Meal Plan Atlantis Bahamas 2010

Noch 'ne chain!

time found Hot Hoops , for 6,95 €.

Chevy Truck Pink Bowtie Emblem

survey on intra-party democracy

think What Pirates of the inner-party democracy? I tried this with an online survey to capture . The detailed analysis can be found in the below attached presentation. The survey was collected as part of the Federal Party in Chemnitz.

start screen of the survey

occasion for the talk was the Open-Liquid meeting. The talk was streamed live. The recording of the presentation will be available soon.

• The presentation as a PDF (90mb!)
• The presentation as a keynote file (Mac or iPad only!)
• raw data of the survey markers including (Exel)
• raw data of the survey adjusted (Exel)
• My basic questions to the survey (MS Word)
• the survey as an SPSS file (including satisfaction index)
• some insight statistical analysis (MS Word)

Here, the recording of the talk - but with poor sound quality. The video will be replaced in a few days through better quality.

Sample Hand Written Will

Niklas Luhmann and the Pirate Party: Caught in a "closed system policy?

A theoretical explanation for the failure of inner-party democracy in many parties also delivers the systems theory, the sociology of Niklas Luhmann and his extensive work has shaped life . This theory and its applicability to the pirate theme party were in the Issue 24 of the podcast " Penta Cast . The Host (pseudonym "Klobe") talked to the blogger and student Ben Gunn.

the story - especially the last 15 minutes - I found it interesting to me because he reminded us that Niklas Luhmann - hidden behind a lot of theory - provided many important ideas that supports the criticism of the intra-party democracy.

Luhmann's criticism, I would now like to briefly summarize and then ask the question whether the new approach of "Liquid Democracy" Luhmann's conceptual can defuse criticism.

(The following points I have in part taken from my term paper of N. Luhmann.)

Modern society sees Luhmann not as "a body", but divides them into itself as it were evolutionarily progressive, functionally differentiated units - comparable to the spreading biodiversity. These subsystems communicate constantly reproduce themselves by themselves (autopoiesis ). Large units could include the economy, politics or law. Individuals have little significance in the theorem. All human behavior is - even if it is the players do not realize -. the logic of each system subject

Niklas Luhmann

The boundaries of the subsystems is about communication. Each system stands out from his own on a binary encoding. Thus, a "super code" for example, power / non-force in politics. It is important that Luhmann argued here that all sub-systems can only communicate in their own code. And all systems have only the (their own) system, but they place, preferably free environment.

There is no cross-border inputs and outputs. What is perceived as an input, is only in self-constructed information system . The attempt to communicate with other systems fail regularly because the other subsystems always think and act in their own codes. An example. The Government (≈ system policy) intensified the protection against dismissal, the result in the economic system is not primarily that workers are now better protected, but also increased unemployment. An unintended reaction of Economic Systems. Why was that? Well, the employer now wanted the increased financial risk of a hard-setting is no longer over it. The economic system thinks that is in your code: [money] Have & Have Not

Luhmann speaks of the impossibility of communication.. This goes so far as to define the specific systems in their own reproduction of the communication so much from each other that they 'autonomous' are. Autonomous but not independent in the sense of other systems (the legal system needs to continue as policy targets), but in terms of self-control. They are each other closed Systems - other parts of society to the already mentioned system environment.

radical looks Luhmann said due to the self-perpetuating closed societies, the resulting inability to cross-border communication, the resulting mutual transparency, not a social center and no hierarchy of subsystems. Luhmann concludes that no single system may make sense to intervene in the other.

The political system, above all the parties constructing them are closed systems with their own perception and presentation logic. The radical nature of these systems theory should not be underestimated. Finally Luhmann considers the policy (content dimension of the policy) and polity dimension (political programs) for largely meaningless. Only the Politics - the political struggle for share of power - there would remain. Although the system reacts policy on communicative disorders (sit-ins of the anti-nuclear movement, new morals, scandals), nonetheless, but only if it changes in its own binary code ("Increases or decreases the electoral chances (of power)?").

These ideas contradict the ideals of a democratic discourse as especially Jürgen Habermas shaped, and are considered ideal basis for representative democracy, fundamental.

constituted after the podcast this theory in detail, said studio guest Ben Gunn, that the Pirate Party now he is system logic "of power / non power" subject. The pirate party "should connectable Communicate" (ie, reduce the complexity of their issues to the outside world, and reproduced by increasing communication, the party base), they wanted to compete and be successful in the party. However, this would lead to a dilution of the profile of what the panelists in both the Open (long) but also to observe the Pirate Party (now).

Ben Gunn predictive performance with the reference to the system logic that "would make the Pirate Party in 40 years, an interior minister, also exacerbate the safety of these laws will be." After all, the former pacifists and peace party, the Greens, the Federal Republic in the first attack would have caused war after 1945.

How can break the Pirate Party in the case of closed systems?

asks the last three minutes, the moderator, if the Pirate Party could do something to improve the condition. Then Ben Gunn:

"I do not think that parties are the problem, but the parliamentary system. [...] The Parliamentary system and the constitution written under impression of the Third Reich and especially to prevent something. Namely the arrival of a single party. And for that certain mechanisms are built. "

Gunn goes on to say that this system is dominated by the Americans. They believed that Hitler had come through direct democracy to power. And to prevent a second Hitler, the authors wanted in the constitution just no elements of direct democracy.

This had, however, the parliamentary democracy in Germany to a particularly large form of the "closed and self-referential system" formed. 40 years of political communication, the system would continue to be worn out and a great process of convergence around the 'alleged Centre'. Although the policy was about to Willy Brandt, Herbert Wehner or Konrad Adenauer not brilliant, but distinguishable today are the parties -. If at all - only for the actual election distinguishable. After that they will blend in again, exacerbating the sense of "broken" election promises.

fact that the "brilliant" politician with charisma and a distinct program does not include us, not just a feeling, but could also be due to the different occupations of the Bundestag and their ways in the policy (usually straight party careers) demonstrate. complement me That expressive politicians more likely to prevail in a directly democratic systems, also shows the surprising underdog success of Barack Obama, who checked in, one of the Parties, could enforce codes against Hillery Clinton.

for Gunn could to fix the "system failure" of the Federal Republic only by "more direct democracy" profitable [1] .

Luhmann and Liquid Democracy - my conclusion

I Think Gunn is right: Only with more direct democracy, that is a more immediate and binding commitment of those in power to the people, whose will can find greater resonance.

The here described to me by full implementation of Liquid Democracy (ie, including the resolution of representative, parliamentary system), probably would be the most radical implementation of direct democratic idea (and probably also the only technically possible ?). It would make parties not superfluous, but they take a monopoly on political opinion and decision-making and as you Antitrust weaken. But it's possible without abolition of parliamentary democracy?

implementation of Liquid Democracy within parties

Could the cash to help democracy within parties? Inner-party democracy could help to break the system logic of Luhmann? Gunn said that would be the "closed system policy" weakened by LQFB. LQFB would lead to more problems within the respective party. Interference would be permanently institutionalized in virtually the parties

question is whether it does not take place (as before) of the Board, speculate now has members in LQFB on the power-political implications of their demands were. Would members in LQFB perhaps even weaken their own claims, so that their party coalition viable? Or party members would even give up some claims? How much would dominate policy considerations of this kind makes the inner-party debate?

From my superficial so far (!) Observation in the Pirate Party, I do not feel (!) That the political power (consequences) debate would be dominant. The members argue mostly content, barely-making strategically. Often, the members of their ideas, beliefs and Views are so important that it does not involve political considerations.

I therefore see (among all speculation at this statement) to the risk of political corruption makes the LQFB participants as rather low. So I think the LQFB a good way to release the parties from the Luhmann'schen system logic.

[1] Gunn's criticism that may have a say in the Pirate Party and the "10% complete failure, in other parties are sorted out, "is here in an interesting contradiction. As much as I also have many 'idiots' upset, so it is always very well the phenomenon of direct democracy, it also a certain proportion of persons are obtained as 'confused confusion' could be described. As long as there are opinions you have to endure such an alternative system (The tolerance must end, of course, however, where bear false statements of fact (such as Holocaust denial, etc.), trolls, spam or offensive).


image sources: Academic , Penta Cast

Where Can I See Free Jesse Jane

chain reaction.

If the Chains is not glamorous? Especially the far right I think it's great.
(If all of ASOS and costs about 7 €.)

How To Add Cheats On Gpsphone Mac

A good day.

first My absolute favorite Deodorant: Dove go fresh cucumber scented tea-&. Cucumbers are great! :)
second Lecker Happa-happa. Miracoli.
third I chill in bed ...
4th ... And eat candy instead prefer baby food! :)

Yesterday I found two pictures of me, where I've fallen right. Thus, FIG technical. Evening in bed, I then plans about what I will not do anything or get back to look. And this morning I have this plan but in fact implemented in practice. (This is not always the case with me. I am often faced with many things and forget that usually the next morning you.) So I am today, earlier than otherwise stood up and had me go into McFit. Gabs to snack today nothing, except just baby food. But that is quasi only fruit that is okay! And yes, I'm proud of myself. Tomorrow I go shopping. As a reward, so to speak. ;)

Poems About Taking Care Of New Baby

24012011

blouse & knit vest: Zara my favorites I once collected. (I'm the color combination of love brown, white and blue, knitwear and leather (look), because in my heart I am an Indian girl:)!)

Now it is only time that it is finally summer! (Spring I would suffice for now already.) I hate the winter. . (

Yes, especially the West it did to me. I will buy it. All! ;)

How To Bring Out Red In Skin

Indian girl.


who wonders what I have driven in the last two months so and why I was no time for blogging, you should read more on this if anyone is interested, then that is also matter. I will write it one way or the

Krypto Math Game Numbers 6 7 11 13 12

Inner-party decision-making - the basics

The basic principles of internal party decision-making has Ulrich von Alemann in his book "The party system of the Federal Republic of Germany" laid down in the chapter [1] .

Alemannian first warns against underestimating the complexity of the topic, as parties are extremely complex organizations. Many actors with different objectives that move on a platform whose principles themselves are continuously changing. The political science could learn a lot of organizational research.

Already in his introduction know Alemannian out the contradiction of any intra-organizational democracy: Either the Board refers to the base, however, refers to socially no echo (no power expansion of the organization). Or the leadership gets involved in co-operation partner, which, however, to the detriment of Members' interests go.

"representation recruitment and administration are difficult to be optimized problems, they often lead to buffer conflicts and to an organizational internal differentiation to the conflicting requirements." (Aleman, p.127)

Legal basis:

The inner-party democracy is derived from Article 21 of the Basic Law, as well as in the guiding principles of Article 20 paragraph 1 GG. Until 1967, the parties created under pressure from the Federal Constitutional Court of the Political Parties Law. From out of it can be derived principles for inner-party democracy:

Party Internal:

• Vertical construction: from bottom to top, from the base to the leadership, all the power in theory to the base
• Functional design: regular election of board members, responsibilities of board members over the party conventions, recallable, separation of powers (party arbitrators independently by the Board)
• Regional Building: embarrassing split with certain transfers of competence, but also by strong Durchgrifsrecht point against "dissenting part associations"
• fundamental rights of members: equal rights and equal voting rights, freedom of expression, protection from arbitrary exclusion and entry refusal

Ext:

• transparency of the party against public through disclosure requirements of statutes, program and board appointments and disclosure of party finances
• of candidates for federal and state election law requires Democratic nomination by party conventions

to Research of the inner-party democracy:

Whether parties should be organized democratically within the party "shall" and if so, how much is debatable. Here are the two fundamental propositions:

a) After the "governmental inference parties operate in Germany as a Kind of quasi-constitutional body. Thus, it suffices if parties like the German Parliament on the model of representative democracy are organized (current state).
b) After the "participatory and emancipatory 'approach, party members and citizens, the rule of the parties subject. Supporters of this thesis are calling for close ties to the party leadership at its base with as much direct democratic elements (examples:. "Recall" rotation offices, imperative mandate) (see Aleman, p. 133).

"The basic question of intra-party democracy is a key issue of young party sociology already been around the turn of the century. It has since been the political science never let go "(Aleman, p. 133)

THE CLASSICS

As Robert Michel's classic leads Alemann" The Sociology of parties in modern democracy. . Studies on the oligarchic tendencies of group life '(1911) and Moisei Ostrogorski's "structural and systemic problems of democracy" (1902) to

1) Moisei Ostrogorski:

diagnosis
- The consequences of the industrial revolution and the new electoral law exceed the capacity of the citizen
-. Thus emerged as a link between the electorate and the political leaders of political parties.
- Party organizations begin to develop its own, and exercise power and control over an indifferent citizenry.
- Government soabhängig of the party organizations.
- Party organizations, think only of their own benefits: the common good suffers.

solution:
- Abolition of the parties
- instead: The functions of parties are to be transferred to temporary associations with a clear purpose. they dissolve, if the purpose is achieved. (note Author ': Reminiscent of the crew concept of the Pirate Party)
- by this organization is the corrupting influence of political parties neutralized
- a "natural elite", characterized by commitment and skills would the power by the leadership in political issues take (Sounds too much like pirate or Greens in the foundation phase)

reactions : The U.S.
including limited response to the criticism, the power of party organizations. Instead, they sat in an open primary elections (primaries). The noticeable weakness of American political parties today is probably a late consequence of this reform (Aggregated by Aleman, see p. 135).

2) Robert Michel

criticism that parties not in a position to impose democracy within the party for which they were so taken up initially. Therefore, parties would end inevitably in complex societies in the driver's structures.

Michels says that technical conditions of communication would be impossible to find democratic decisions in larger groups. The maximum group for direct-democratic decisions suspected Michel 1,000 and 10,000 people. As a result, delegation of power was necessary. That delegation, however, leads automatically to an "education gap of organization and expertise of a guide layer, so a power advantage to win her. Base of oligarchic power are not only the hierarchy inherent coercive powers, but also knowledge monopolies. "(See Wikipedia) .

The following are the prominent elite corrupted according to Michel's inevitable. Transformed Inner Organizational democracy and the dynamics of the group in ;. stolid, conservative bureaucracy As a result, alienated the elite from its base

Alemann criticized Michels work, however: He had only deterministic theories that are very dubious, deductive "occupied" with case Recording on

The sociology of organizations.. support Michel's basic thesis, however, if a little cautious: According organizations tend to "ruling elites a head of communications, information and other government agents to enter the hand." (Aleman, p. 135)

Frieder Naschold [3] contradicts Michel's pessimism. He writes that effective organizations need, especially in complex societies, internal democracy:

"Organization and democracy, industrial democracy and efficiency are not contradictory but compatible and almost dependent on each other's motivation and participation of members of the organization, decentralization, identification. and increased communication does not interfere, but large organizations strengthened. Against Michaels holds Naschold: more efficiency and democracy through increased participation in organizations. Produce complex societies, one might say to a head, a constraint to increased democracy. (Aleman, p. 135) This theory

Aleman believes it would be too optimistic, and the empirical reality is contradicted organization.

Alem writes in conclusion that hierarchical structures: stability of the action, the motivation and the Inter Verne combinations are possible. In particular, fast-break moves quickly back together.

REFORM PROPOSALS:

is in a later chapter before Alemann which reform proposals are:

1. All power to the voters
2. All power to the members
3. All power to the professionals

1) All power to the voters: Abolish the parties is at the forefront of these proposals. Often referenced by these representatives of the American primaries.

2) All power to the members: parties should therefore learn from the flexible social movements. was an advocate such as Wolfgang Michael with his book "The SPD - State faithful and Family Safe (1988). All evils are therefore of the Parteiapperaten. The solution: Parties should focus more strongly to current issues. Problem but also citizens' initiative to come and go. [In this column would sort them and the proposal of Liquid Democracy.]

3) All power to the professionals: This was also the titles of policy consultant Peter Graff (1991 - SPD). He called for parties to take up as a service company selling a "perfect product". Similar calls Peter Radunski (1991) long-standing campaign manager of the CDU, a party faction in the professionals and not amateurs determine. Joachim Raschke suggested in his book "The Greens. How they became what they are" (1993) the model of a professional "under party" before by a professional core works. Instead members are only supporters.

----

(1) From Aleman, Ulrich: The party system of the Federal Republic of Germany, Hemsbach 2001, p. 125-137.
(2) Kaak, Heino: history and structure of the German party system, Opladen 1971st
(3) Naschold, Frederick, Organisation and Democracy, Stuttgart 1969th

Orthodentist In Johor Bahru

(lessness) of the Pirate Party - summary of a debate

On Thursday, 13 January 2011, found in the online chat Mumble a discussion meeting from the series "The Fat Angel " instead. About 50 pirates took over part of the evening at this digital event. Speakers and topics donor was Bernd Schloemer, Federal Treasurer of the Pirate Party. His 20-minute talk he presented under the heading (lessness) of the Pirate Party .

His talk revolved around the question of how power is distributed within the Pirate Party is, and whether the party itself might have. I try to summarize first Schlömer points and then take interesting ideas from the debate

Schömer lecture.:

1) definition of power

Schloemer was referring to known definitions in the dictionaries : "Power is the ability of a person or organization, their goals _gegen Widerstände_ enforce. power is the social organization of social life, and therefore is inherently neither good nor bad, on the contrary, they may well be regarded as socially necessary. power always means also that there is someone who gives in and put up power can be. Therefore power is always a need for interaction between people or relationships to each other.

[...]

2) forms of power in the Pirate Party

Schloemer reported here from his experiences and observations from two years of his party leadership. The tried doing a typology of power types develop:

a) The process powerful

These are people who the party law, the statutes and regulations to know by heart and power to enforce "due process" . Legal norms, standards expertise can be exploited. Some will be lifted but also actual or alleged pirates special standards or procedures. Schloemer reported that he had never in a voluntary organization was active, where there were so many people who have taken such meticulous attention to meeting standards.

particular, the process may well decide to my mighty well, who in the party one who does not. Exclusion procedures and processes charge before the tribunal, the party atmosphere.

b) The citation

Schloemer Although she has only mentioned in passing, and not as a separate group, but I do not want to be swept under the carpet. One type of exercise of power is probably to make use of the power of the written word. This particular old forum posts or quotes from mailing lists or Twitter messages, quoted by up to infinity rumgeritten it.

c) be familiar with the prompter

The prompter or Whissel-Blower in the party no secrets and continue to tell everything. Either directly, via SMS or e-mail or on the Twitter. The prompter is a very powerful group. Addition, the many channels of communication to influence public opinion too often superficial. Prompter often work only reactive than reactive. They often play the wise guy improve even the smallest mistake. And work the prompter only in writing, or even never occur to face the responsibility.

d) The power possessed

These people want the board and dream of sitting in the parliament or Bundestag. You sit up front, they check constantly to speak, they give speeches. But often they have no power within the party because they are completely isolated and they lack any relationship to other pirates.

3) The power of the Pirate Party (PP)

Schloemer is of the view that the Pirate Party had Mach before, namely in the election year 2009, as she stood in the center of intense reporting and built up with the surprisingly good election result of almost 2 percent and severe pressure on the FDP. As a result, the suspension of the law to block child pornography was interspersed in the coalition agreement.

the PP could also position new topics in politics. Network policy (see Enquete Commission of the Bundestag for the "Digital Society") or the big fuss about data protection in all its forms can be traced back to it. Also, the PP has by far the best target group-oriented campaign on the Web and are thus at the head of the German Part One.

3) The faint - abstinence from relationships

here referred Schloemer strong a current publication of political science " Journal of Parliamentary Affairs " (1 / 2011) . or, more precisely to the article "conditions for success of new parties, examined was proved by the Pirate Party" (co-written songs only, may vary slightly)

the party regardless of the communication and interaction is missing - despite all the new means of communication. Members of the PP have the feeling are not listened to, which leads to a feeling of powerlessness.

4) Without power in the party?

In addition, the treasurer cited a political science internationally accepted scale of party success. Level 1 - the successful application for election. Step 2 - the influence of debate. Level 3 - entry into parliament. Stage 4 - Assessment of other parties to be coalitions. Stage 5 - actual participation in a government. According Schloemer the PP remains in Stage 2 This is all the more astonishing than the conditions for the success of the PP actually given are: target group-oriented approach and a significant knowledge advantage

5) The deficit analysis

- the PP. dominated their interen debates not

- The PP lacks a speech and decision-making center

- Other parties make their political staffs better INHAT work

- the legal conditions for small parties are still difficult

- The PP lacks a professional approach with finances

- Other parties take our core themes of the hand, subjects expansion therefore necessary

Further debate was

Below I listed some interesting points from the debate. Since I could not always assign the person, I have therefore waived this requirement:

• Rapid communication the Pirate Party has a downside. Often it remains (as in Twitter) is superficial and often reflects little about the contents of a message. So to are often simply destructive discussions, which borders on bullying, which some also move to the exit.
  . Criticized
• the complexity of the pirates was media: countless podcasts, wikis, forums, mailing lists, Twitter, Facebook and more. Hesse has been a special rapporteur to consider the local party members about the current internal party debates to date. Schloemer suggested that in future the Board should determine what debate should be conducted where. This then facilitates the orientation for party members.
  .
• also subject: Spread The Federal Executive shall be relieved , more (administrative) tasks to volunteers will also enable the Archive National Board more on the real - could focus the business of politics. There, some members were missing something. Schloemer acknowledges here a failure. Future board members should have the following characteristics: leadership skills, "" capable of making decisions, "" Verantworungsfähig.
  .
• was also interesting, what about Schloemer said power within the Board .
• Basically, there were hardly any power. For each step of the Executive Board is monitored extremely critical of the party base.
• Board member who had power, would have the money. Each year, he estimated cost him his membership of about 4,000 €, which he can not settle (otherwise the protest would be too large). Positive he referred to the party leader Jens Seipenbusch, which, while constantly go for the PP throughout Germany, but to date not a single trip expense report filed. Two members of the Board would last almost feather his personal bankruptcy.
• . In addition, those had more power, which could more (working) time to invest. Board member confirmed this flat hair. As he studies and job between 4 months time, he could "pump iron by" full. The non-payment of directors makes this technically makes the same against the party members (because the board could do very well each day just after the regular bread earning something), but unequal to each other (if, for example, students or unemployed are enabled).
  . was discussed
• also about the lack of expression and decision-making center . This could be the future Liquid feedback. It lacks, however, first, the AGs who post their ideas there, and second, that the Board's successful positions takes it and makes qua decision on the official position of the party. In a further step, this position would then quickly and communicated convincingly to the outside.
  .
• Schloemer himself was the one who wished the Board more " political leadership." Meant it was not the enforcement of hierarchical Parti clear interest of the Board, but rather the adoption of political positions from the party (or something like LQFB AGs). These items must be accompanied by a development strategy in the focus of the next Board.
  .
• In this context, also said that the substantive, political work of the PP too short come. The (often good) work of AGs find no response to the Board and only partially at the national party. There is no accountability in the groups of one essence. Does not criticize in principle it is negative, the distributed "free" character, but the lack of compaction of the debates actually tunable positions. The WG coordinator struggled but very probably it.
  .
• A common theme raised was "lack of professionalism ", especially in administrative procedures. The PP is now with its 16 regional associations with a larger organization. Still to this day still reign chaos, there are no clear management structures. New members are not properly welcomed or imported. AGs were not properly care. Much work would be lost. One discussant said that the PP is not a "hands-party" but a "power but even" party. He feels left alone. It was then referred to the new, decentralized, "virtual office", which only just beginning their work. The welcome of new members was the task of national associations and Festangstellte in an office could lead to encrustation and blockage of processes.
  .
• A pirate said it lacked money to have a campaign. The Treasurer corrected this as the latest on 11 February 2011, funding of political parties to fill the accounts of the pirates am.

praised Finally, many pirates constructive debate in online chat and the dialogue of the Bureau with the pirate base was welcomed.

Lymphoma And Ringworm

evening news interview with Chancellor of the Pirate Party in 2030

The following is not part of my thesis, but rather a fun utopia. Background: The pirates are first arrived in 2030 at all levels in politics. First, they have a nationwide, voluntary Liquid Democracy started instance. How, then interviews the evening news to see with their top personnel?

issues of the day: Good evening, Madam Chancellor!
Mrs. Graf (Pirate Party, Chancellor): Good evening, Mr. Buhrow!

(montage, left Tom Buhrow, right Susanne Graf, currently Vice-Chairman Young pirates)

issues of the day: Mrs. Graf, has opposed the construction of new electricity transmission grid € II in several states considerable opposition formed. 173 000 people yesterday Tweets protest with the hash tag # € II no discontinued. This is but a clear sign. How will they decide?
Chancellor Well, firstly I would like to point out that there are about 370 000 Tweets for the construction of the power grid was € II. I will do this but can not decide alone. In the nationwide Liquid Instant expires next week a vote at this proposal. Our party - the pirates - you're right place, since the party congress in Munich in 2020 for the new power line. But of course we will add the decision of the general population. I can only urge all off next week and log in again to vote.

issues of the day: But this would not be a loss of face for your government if you do not, the new power to enforce?
Chancellor : Yes - because they are right, that's us uncomfortable. You have probably followed yesterday in the live stream of the Cabinet meeting my government. This is a topic that many of my ministers and party members emotionally aroused. We need this power line to the clean solar electricity from the South. But the theme is all German. I may in the government not make the mistake of seeing only our own interests, just because "we" in this legislature in power. We have been so chosen to eliminate this form of "particular-democracy." Germany takes decisions that last longer and not by the next government will be lifted as in the year 2010, the nuclear phase-exit than the FDP still existed.

issues of the day: I've snapped yesterday in the board meeting of her party - even in the pieces flew. Similarly, in the forum, the wiki and the mailing lists of their party. Where are they now?
Chancellor : you know that there are in our party a very open culture of political debate. With all the passion to lose some members - as in real life - sometimes the patient. But this is part of a vibrant democracy, simply. Where our party stands for content, but you can clearly see from the multiple choices in our inner-party vote Liquid feedback system, and continue on applicable federal congress resolution of 2020.

issues of the day: you must € prevail II yes in any case, it has adopted the European Commission, the European network overall capacities?
Chancellor : The people of Bavaria also are not opposed to electricity, but the actual route planning. This, at least they write in their blogs and the many protest messages that have reached us in the chancellery. We will find a compromise.

issues of the day: And where is the compromise?
Chancellor : Well, Mr. Buhrow. I can not know alone. The track design is to complex to be so as an individual or government to overlook. In the event that we fail with the current proposal, the Ministry of Economy will publish all the documents during the planning phase. We would also repeat the route planning. This time, but then after the pirate principle. As part of our ongoing anyway "open governance" initiative will then be in a (adhocracy) Wiki found together with the citizens of a new circuit design, the havoc the least damage. Country by country. We invite everyone to collaborate and ...

issues of the day: Would not you proceed from the outset so?
Chancellor : Yes - this was a mistake. You are right. As an excuse I can give is that we have taken over the planning of our Red-Red-Green government, which has acquired neither participation nor the liberties of individual citizens to be too much worry. Do you know what we found when he took office in the ministries?

issues of the day: What?
Chancellor : Faxmaschienen!

issues of the day: Well, second or quickly to our theme. Yesterday it was in Stuttgart street protests against the Stromnetzbau, as in the park for like a few trees must be [Note the author: I - at the very place designed * G *] . Although the event was entirely peaceful, there was a sudden deployment of the police with pepper spray and water cannons. Several injuries were the result. Who bears responsibility for it?
Chancellor : The police operation is the states. However, you are right. We as a government, of course, always the responsibility when people go in a political debate to the streets.

issues of the day: Now fine words, but that nobody minds. What should happen now?
Chancellor : In consultation with our Pirates of Stuttgart, we initiate an investigation of incidents of crowdsourcing. We invite all citizens to upload their video of the events on the open portal of the Federal Prosecutor for police crimes. All individuals are then invited to help to sift through the extensive material and to identify perpetrators of violence in the police. A device attached there forum and wiki help documentation. The prosecution will then embark on the basis of evidence gathered the normal recourse in the courts.

issues of the day: But this can prevent a lasting power of the police?
Chancellor : now - we hope by a higher detection rate to a deterrent effect. If necessary, we need to think about the increase for a year now introduced nationwide numbers marking the police yet.

issues of the day: Do you think that you of all these crises can once again be re-elected?
Chancellor : Even I make mistakes. Whether it's enough for re-election to decide for us known as the party members in a nationwide letter-based ballot. But yes, I am optimistic.

issues of the day: Finally the question: Both the CDU and the SPD have failed in the regional elections in North Rhine-Westphalia at the 5 percent hurdle. Worried they?
Chancellor No. Democracy is changing

issues of the day. Thank you for the interview!
Kanzerlin: happy again, I'm still your audience for 30 minutes in the chat.

-----

(Susanne Graf serves only as a symbol! She has written the text, nor sanctioned. The photo is from the homepage of the boys pirates and is what this page under a CC license .)

Newton's Law Of Motion Apollo 13

What is happening to the role of party members by Liquid Democracy?

draft text of a section on the possible change in function of the party membership of a innperparteilichen use of Liquid Democracy. If you do additions, criticisms, or similar sources, they simply post in the comments. Thank you!

"What do political parties, professional members?" This provocative question Dr. Klaus Detterbeck from the University of Magdeburg [1] . In this text I would like to briefly summarize his thoughts, and consider whether Liquid Democracy could change the role of party members.

first stated Detterbeck a "professionalization" of political parties, however this same with a crisis. This can be read primarily in the light of the dramatic decline in membership numbers. 2003, (only) 1.55 more million Germans member of the six parties represented in parliament. The level of organization of the voters, at 2.5 percent below the level of the 60 years. At the same time there is a high degree of politicization of the population that wants to be involved in political decisions. It is this contradiction between high interest and low party membership a Europe-wide phenomenon [2] , this little comfort.

addition to the dramatic decline in membership, provides Detterbeck further signs of crisis of parties:

• Low recruitment ability of the parties in East Germany
• passivity of many party members in regard to the organizational life
• Under Proportional representation of women
• Small number of young party members

When is a party "modern"? How to recognize a "modern" parties? (see p. 290 f. Detterbeck)

• The public appearance and internal decision-making processes of the parties are primarily shaped by professional politicians, their power resources from their Functions in parliaments and governments take.
• State action in parliaments and governments has become a central reference point for the parties. Elite recruitment and policy production is central to the parties.
• Programmatic social positions and creative projects the parties are weak by the voters wide orientation and the inter-party cooperation in parliamentary life contoured .
• in the design of election campaigns is media marketing and communications experts working as bars in the party headquarters or as an external service provider for the parties, a prominent Importance.
• diversity of state of the areas in the career strategies of professional politicians and the complexity of internationalized policy are mutually reinforcing.

But why lose this "modern" parties so many members? Detterbeck called two in the common political science theories:

A) parties no longer have to rely on members and / or for modern party members can even be a burden. Loss of members is not a problem, but a desired side effect.
B) parties are victims of various modern, social developments.

A) deliberate loss of members

According to this model, the decline of party members a conscious calculus or at least accept change and therefore no theoretical problem of democracy: "The competitors paradigm accepts the dominance of political elites in mass democracies." A voter is only the task "between competing professional groups to select management" (p. 292). Inner-party democracy in this model would be more harmful because it limits the flexibility of the political elites. Political elites should be guided by this model, the less "radical party activists, but rather at" moderate voters. " Possible waiver of the party members including the following change is:

• mass media allow the party elites a direct approach to the voters. The mediation by party members no longer necessary.
• Larger state benefits have replaced the declining membership fees.
• campaigns were centralized, professionalized and today are mainly capital-intensive rather than members.

party members are therefore not only replaceable, but almost dangerous. Parties had to be open to electoral success and win as a socially heterogeneous following. Parties as campaign organizations eventually Stimmmenmaximierung forced to. This has led to a "devaluation of the role of each party member" [3] .

B) parties have lost ability to motivate citizens to participate.

According to this model, there were a number of more social reasons why fewer people want to participate in political parties:

• erosion of social milieus and individualization tendencies.
• A higher educational level of independence in the political opinion out. This weakens the traditional socialization role of the parties.
• A higher degree of political Information promotes higher standards of political participation and promotes dissatisfaction with the hierarchical and elite-centered style of politics.
• The leisure time has changed. Parties offer little or social incentives. In addition, there would be many more alternatives: television, sports, clubs. Other reasons: increased prosperity, changing consumer habits.

Detterbeck, however, provides all things but in the first approach, the reasons for the decline in membership. Parties have therefore learned to live with the loss of members and come to terms with it. This is problematic because the party members also today for the democratic legitimacy of the institution "party" is decisive. Only with a broad popular participation in an active inner-party democracy could justify the parties to its prominent role in virtually all state institutions.

"Here we meet to say a very different democracy theoretical understanding of the political process than in the previously mentioned competitors paradigm. While there, members of the functions of the inter-party competition rather difficult to be met in Trasmissionsparadigma only through the active participation of the citizens of the democratic principle of life."

criticized in his summary Detterbeck the half-hearted solutions with which the parties currently on the problem of "lack of internal party democracy" experiment . He requested that the parties should decide clear: either they rely on an efficient, autonomous party leadership and resign themselves to the fact that their party has few members of the party, or put them to effective participation of the base, then the benefits of party members to be able to perceive. Elite autonomy of the Board and members commitment to realize the same time lead, but just too many contradictions:

"To perform a party primary elections, work out, however, that these play a minor role, or purely affirmative act to give party leaders. many opportunities for debate, but also undermine the decision-making bodies of the party. Whether regional conferences, discussion forums or online communications, the emphasis is on the consultation of the members, not their votes. [This] is the loss of members can not stop. "(P. 302)

" are parties, without having to get the issue is under control, can thus rightly concerned when the attractiveness of their membership organization due to lack of opportunities for participation continues to decline "( p. 303)

Liquid Democracy What could change the situation?

First of all, I would disagree with Detterbeck so far that here is not primarily put the parties in the crisis. They are living - as he described it - actually quite well with the situation, even if they "die off" more members. The real "crisis" currently experienced even the democratic system in the Federal Republic. Not to cure the parties, but for the healing of the entire political system needs to be inner-party democracy "repaired".

Liquid feedback, while meeting the demands that Dr. Detterbeck has defined: It would be a serious, direct democratic tool that gives extensive possibilities of Beteiligiung, which (depending on the implementation) is actually the scope of party elites could limit. What happened if they would express the majority of CDU supporters against an extension of the nuclear run-time? It is expected that the sense "to influence" by Liquid feedback considerably increases, even if the Board and factions refusing to follow any decision.

But Liquid Democracy goes beyond the requirement of only "a tool for direct-democratic views on finding" beyond. And this increase of the function is to see that it each party member to open and allows for initiatives related to his party majorities.

Dettmer has described above, that party executives for electoral reasons tend to avoid clear positions and indulging in compromise wording to address broader groups of voters, but also to integrate all party wings. In addition to program applications will be rejected on national conventions in any case. This would be a loss of face for the board.

A single member of the party has tended to bring a higher risk applications, which might find a majority in his party. Also, individual party members think less strategically where optimal "overall thrust" of their party would be, but simply want to enforce only "their" position. This can lead to significant intra-party surprises. DONE the Pirate Party, which advocated abolition of the incest case for a paragraph. Such a sensitive application - without urgent social necessity - would have avoided any board well. First, because the vote would have been totally unpredictable, the other probably also to prevent a potential target for other parties in the election campaign.

long run, Liquid feedback sharpen so the profiles between the parties and thus create even described by Dr. Detterbeck "lost social identification" with the parties again. Also, could the permanent correction of the base (which is so often in compromise ) mean that the party much more in Interests of the voter, thus increasing even the electoral prospects of the party. Total

me the model of inner-party democracy is more convincing. Citizens should not have only every four years, the ability to respond to the political elites with a dismissal or confirmation. Especially the often cited the complexity of the policy, it makes more necessary than ever for voters to take, thematic influence to be able to swing without simultaneously with the recall-lobe.


------


(1) Detterbeck, Klaus: Members of professionalized parties: What do political parties, members; in: Melchert, Florian (ed.): Instead of beginning decline - the future of the party members, Berlin 2009, p.289-304.
(2) Scarrow, Susan E.: Parties without members? Party organization in a changing electoral environment, in: Dalton, Russell J., Wartenberg, Martin P. (eds.): Parties without Partisans. Political change in advanced industrial democracies. Oxford 2000, p. 79-101.
(3) quoted by Detterbeck: see Kirchheimer, Otto: The Transformation of Western European party system, in: Political Quarterly 6, 1965, p. 32

Combinations With And Without Repetition

Why my MA thesis on the blog writing How

I am asked frequently why I my master's work online and in writing short texts, I wanted to here to refer again:


I do not think that the power generation more or less communicated as others before us. I just think that we communicate differently . Brought in past centuries, horses have the letters between the scholars, they tried as much as possible to write a letter, since the transport of the letter was very expensive. Even the printing was expensive, but it was the most efficient way to write down a complete thought construct. And we tried all criticisms and contingencies already taken into account, because before you could react with a second work on his critics, would possibly take years.
we live today in an "attention economy . Information is transported to become virtually free. But this has led (you could see it as an irony of history) does not mean that people now send longer texts, but, strangely, always shorter. Why is that?

• Since the information transport is free, we do not get anymore "too little" too much information but rather much (spam / infinite number of texts / ideas from anywhere).

• The new cost factor or the lack of resource is, therefore, "time". There is so much information as possible to process in a short time.

• The reader can read with a good (pre) selection all the more of what really interests him.

• This calls for author to think, however, in the shortest possible formats and write.

• Shorter texts have a higher success rate than longer texts (of course only as far as the consolidation of the information does not slip away into the emptiness).

Short texts are perfect for the era of information overload. Any philosophical idea can be on two Din-A4 pages limit. Rather than install all sorts of criticisms in a long work in advance, I use the (possible thanks to the Internet) active debate to discuss with my readers / critics. This ping-pong game is here today partly within hours back and forth, leading to a refreshing discussion. Advantage: The reader can decide where in the argument he gets and where it ends. Also come together as soon a lot more ideas than with a solitary author in the famous lonely tower of science.

The most radical form of information dissemination and selection of news Twitter is currently with only 140 characters, which often contain a link for more info. " Again, the reader can always click on "more".


In this connection again to you the invitation: If you are interested in the topic of inner party democracy in Liquid feedback or the Pirate Party you get in touch. I am pleased with criticism / suggestions.

(audit Sample Size Calculator)

monopolize their party executive power - the crisis of inner-party democracy would

draft text for a section on the state of inner-party democracy in Germany. If you do additions, criticisms, or similar sources, they simply post in the comments. Thank you!

The pirates want to improve the inner-party democracy of their party with the introduction of Liquid Democracy. To understand this, the following will be a look into the forays of the old parties practiced internal party democracy.

Uwe Thaysen [1] has already done 1986th He criticized even then the "oligarchies" of the parties in the Federal Republic, that the increasing concentration of power in the federal executive boards and councils and the loss of power for the party based on the substantive direction of the party.



Thaysen cited First Robert Michels' iron law of oligarchy "(1911), under which the fall begins with every form of organization:" Who says organization, says tendency to oligarchy, "and" The power of the leader grows in the same scale as the organization, "and "The mother of the rule of the elected representatives of the voters, the officers on the client, the delegates about Deligierenden" the party organization. [2]

Thaysen was but warns against over-stretch to Michels. Of law could be no question. In 1986, members had the parties together around two million members and still not been transformed into leaders parties, . But rather an active party life But from that time were already drawing serious problems:

Thaysen were followed up in a list of all the facts to the party oligarchies, which I would like to play here sometimes quoting, sometimes in summary:

• social gap between membership (middle class) voters (bottom layer) and leadership (higher social and educational level) of the party
• centralization of all politically significant material and personnel decisions as possible to the higher level
• "Property Policy emptying of participation" (posters ) stick
• Voksparteien "Defuse" party programmatic and leave greater scope for development of handedness of the boards
• concentration of the programmatic planning in expert circles, commissions and advisory committees. District and local associations to participate therein, and usually do not remain on the sidelines. Accordingly, the key initiatives are not delegates, but from the highest party level.
• more or less discrete direction of the Congress prevents equal opportunity to talk. Party leadership has a "strong political predominance. Instruments directed the Commission's request, the editorial staffs and all costs silent operation of the Rules of Procedure.
• The dominant (self-) understanding of the parties as a fighting organization.. "Often, and relentless - but also often wrongly - to be made intra-party opponents to silence consensus should prevail then the party leaders have a generally accepted scope would need freedom, not previously of party meetings shake "canonical" statements. These statements are, however, fell only once, is it only at the cost of the allegation "lack of solidarity action." [3]
• The party heads have a sort of programmatic policy-making authority "increased and partly in their written statutes (eg SPD).
• Most its influence in the recruitment of top personnel. Only 100,000 delegates of the two million party members decide on all candidates and therefore two-thirds of the entire Bundestag. (Today, this is probably more dramatic, since often the candidates for party list seats, and boards are sophisticated in advance of party days).
• all in the dark of the party leadership will remain the decision of who the next chancellor candidate. There are in Germany (unlike, for example in the U.S. or the UK) no established written procedures. The party conventions is "presented" to the chancellor candidate of the Board. He then remains only the acclamation, approval by applause.
• Progressive shares professionalisation of political party members in knowing and unknowing, to-do and non-wealthy. The political professionals do not only live for politics. They also benefit from the policy. They are initiated. You know the machine, the game rules, the bylaws, the state of discussion of the planning bodies, and - more importantly - the state of discussion of personnel coterie. Their knowledge is their political dowry. And they have time to politics
• incompatibility
• habit claim the incumbent of reward / retention of his office
• also.: Apathy of the majority (of other interests, gratitude, leadership and devotion need)

The tendency towards domination of the few within the party recognizes Thaysen in the Political Parties Act, which - as the basic law - emanating from the "inevitability of dominance." The decisive point is the use and control of power. The intra-party control, notes Matthew, however, was developed within the party is much weaker than they have about the parliament against the government.

should be the inner-party democracy for Thaysen:

• strict adherence to the majority rule and minority protection
• decision-oriented participation of each party member

That, however, to realize even conceptually difficult as following the delegates and elected party leaders, the rules of representative democracy, not bound by imperative mandates of their voters, but on the contrary, as political leaders would prove. If the delegates are not necessarily guided by those whom they have delegated this stand the principle of "inner-party democracy" diametrically opposed. (Contradict Why representative democracy and direct democracy, I have explained in detail in this text )

This contradiction is even more clear when the inner-party democracy is lived. Within a short time unity is required. The Constitution defined the party task "Elaboration of political vision" (within the party) so koliert permanently to the second task of the parties - namely the "influence of government decision-making within the meaning of this objective" (external locus of action of the party) Yes. in general, is by the latter task of reaching a consensus within the party stalls.

proposes in his conclusion Thaysen but conciliatory tones. He pointed out that the Political Parties Act, the special role of the party executive wanted, and the Board are responsible in principle for his work would have. His main criticism he expressed at the apathetic majority that much too often himself would not accept any responsibility.

In his last point I want to speak again Thaysen. First, select the boards of its members, mostly from himself. Internal party known "opposition" will probably have little chance in this competition.

accuse the party members apathy I also think is questionable. For if the structures do not provide opportunities for substantive participation, and it is difficult aware, then the blame is simply the wrong one.

Too good to note is that the Board indeed had to justify to the party's base for his job (if this process works at all), a consolation the fact that the majority of the members bring in not more active in party work can.

----

[1] Thaysen, Uwe: "Thinking without discussion to intra-party democracy in the Federal Republic ", in: Graf von Krockow, Christian and Clear, Peter. parties in the crisis, 1986 Munich, p. 59-71
[2] Michels, Robert:" The Sociology of the party system ", Stuttgart oJ , p. 381
[3] Thaysen has at this point to the fact that numerous studies have shown that intra-party consensus is overrated as a condition for success of the party. Finally, the Greens have had despite continuing intense intra-party disputes with great success.

How To Become A Wolf By Spells

What do Jean-Jacques Rousseau Liquid Democracy?

first draft text of a section on theoretical sorting of Liquid feedback. sources and websites will step by step added. If you do additions, criticisms, or similar sources, they simply post in the comments. Thank you!

The political scientist and former candidate for the federal presidency, Gesine Schwan, in 1986 reported to mandate rotation of the Greens say. Your Text [1] raises fundamental questions, which serves as an introduction to the question of where to locate Liquid Democracy is philosophical.

The violation of the Greens in the 80s was an exciting idea: MPs should give up in the middle of the legislative mandate to assume their substitutes its Office. This should prevent that, the Bundestag remove from the "normal people" and the voter's will, and abuse of power and the emergence of green career politicians complicate the basic idea of the mandate rotation is due to direct-democratic ideas from the French Revolution and the Soviet Republic. Liquid Democracy would also bind the policy stance closer to the electorate. In which drawer So are these ideas?


Gesine Schwan discussed in this context, the two great European traditions of democratic theory: the identity-(direct democracy), and representative democracy. This is what I want to understand short, then a sorting order of Liquid Feedback make.

1) identitarian / direct democracy
Representative: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Karl Marx, Lenin, anarchists, modern protagonists of the Soviet Republic
core idea is that people retains absolute sovereignty over his will. Chosen must therefore adhere absolutely to the will of voters. MPs serve only as a "technical medium" in large territorial states, as a kind of "executive body", without its own political will. Members are permanently available. Vital mission, ie not adopted may differ from the electoral mandate, represents only the Interests of his constituents.
ideals abolition of the "domination" of the few over the "ruled"
problems What is the will of voters?

Rousseau: Target does not have the "will of all", but the general will (volonté generale ") long. This is what, after deduction for all individual and particular interests of individual turns out to be an advantage for society / people. [The need for "democracy" at that time was unthinkable. Rousseau was primarily with the "general will question the monarch lent her qua Catholic Church" God-given " to avoid identification.]

But even in the 20th century would be at issue, as one might DETERMINATION to hundreds of issues the general will. For Rousseau, and for many socialists, identity-democracy is possible only under two conditions:

1) The company must overcome through education / information / her broaden awareness of conflicts of interest and homogeneously. The man is selfish in the fact of a caring nature walk. The man then would find its fulfillment will not in the independence of the society, but in union with the general will.
2) The objects the law must simply be kept for any political lay transparent and manageable.

Marx hoped that unlike Rousseau, that result in the historical development of the production process into a homogeneous community wants to become. Lenin was again ready for the general will through coercion of a minority to impose on the majority.

2) Representative democracy
Representative: John Locke, Charles de Montesquieu, Ernst Fraenkel, Edmund Burke
core idea: There is no complete agreement between voters and elected (reality too complex, at the time of election is not information about all decisions of the legislature in stock). The person elected may differ from the electorate. The person elected is not available. The person elected represents public interests, not only the interests of "his" voters. The "free mandate" secures no regards to the Party and voters. Voters can judge "only" after the expiration of the term "total conduct" of the candidates, but not individual decisions.
ideals securing individual freedom, separation of powers, parliamentary debate
problems
a) Argumentative debate in Parliament illusory. Instead, exhibition matches to the public.
b) Free mandate in fact hardly realistic. It is abused for personal benefit or is under the pressure of lobbying or re-election interests and / or political group, association and party pressures.
c) In the wake of actual voters, or the binding contract between electors and elected is often completely lost, with disastrous consequences such as loss of faith, politics and opposition to the representative system.

intermediate result:

Gesine Schwan sorts the rotation of the Greens in the first group (without, of course, the Greens in a corner with Lenisten or Marxists to ) Position. It recognizes the attempt to introduce democratic ideals of Rousseau directly without a dictatorship to do. Nevertheless, she stated that the objective can not be satisfied if either the condition of the harmonious society nor the radically simplified policymakers met. Until this occurs, benefits from the principle of rotation is not the will of the people, but the institution that forces the members to rotate.

And where is now Liquid Democracy? Are
Unfortunately, so far no "official definition", nor a philosopher who has "the" Liquid Democracy defined model. Instead, I would like at this point preliminary Definition from the Pirates Wiki viewpoints and these refer .

Like the pirates, I will distinguish below between the whole society (1) and the intra-party (2) approach by Liquid Democracy:

(1) Liquid Democracy for society binding decision tool

Liquid Democracy maintains a hybrid between direct and representative democracy to be. This assertion is only partially correct. For Liquid Democracy is nothing but the abolition of the Parliament and its Members / Repräsentatnten [2]. Replaced by a transparent Parliament voting software on the Internet by all citizens have a voice. All decisions taken by then, Parliament will now be taken by citizens in the software [3]. So it's actually the most radical form of direct democracy, which is conceivable.



What are the consequences? Well - first of all, the entire problem area is eliminated by Rousseau, Marx and Lenin, or agents of the Soviet Republic had to fight. For there can be no more difference between the citizen's will and the will of its representatives. Why? Because there are no more representative. The "delegate" votes can be so dissatisfied at any time be withdrawn or transferred to someone else.

This is also the (probably?) Utopian hope for a re-education through dictatorship and brought about general will (volonté generale) superfluous. Instead of a "dictatorship of the few" who enforce a common will as always justified, in the Liquid Democracy, the majority prevails.

And that can change entirely. Because in contrast to direct democracy, there is no binding of MPs to predetermined, unchangeable Decisions. Laws and decisions in the Liquid Democracy apply - as in a parliamentary democracy - until they are repealed by a different decision / law.

There is also collected in representative democracy, competing interests, which (here must be speculated lack Implementation) most likely to interest organizations .
The concept of "delegation" to friends, experts or groups may still same complexity for the individual citizen can be reduced. He no longer has to deal with politics, as in representative democracy, but it can. A Another point why, complexity is not a big problem, explains about the new features of the Internet as Schwarminterligenz or abrogation of the information transport capacity, see detail here .
CONCLUSION: So I would the Liquid Democracy as a radical form of direct democracy classify, but - because they omitted to representatives, bypasses many problems with earlier proposals for direct democracy at least on a theoretical level. In order to answer the question
the title: Rousseau might have been thrilled.

[Interestingly, however, could be the issue of whether the (as they are defined) Chief Executive (ministers, secretaries of state and government) to act on the decisions taken by the majority and whether we will allow deviations. Also the dilemma of the delegation has only shifted it to?]

(2) Liquid Democracy as an intra-party tool to shape opinion in the Pirate Party of Germany

The now currently in Pirate Party created software called Liquid feedback solution is much simpler from a theoretical point of view . Sort them Lack of decision-making power is neither a segregated into their representative or direct democracy, democratic theory. Instead, the software is optional as a "feedback channel" to the broad party basis for the decision-making bodies of the party (currently the board and the party conventions) to be considered.

In principle, the intra-party application, like described above, to be classified as direct democratic tool. However, the party executive and the national party easily deviate from the decisions.

CONCLUSION: The independent mandate of representative democracy (here in relation to the party leadership) remains preserved. Liquid feedback in this Zuammenhang and development at this time only a tool of internal party opinion formation, development and documentation. That produces no democratic theory problems.

----


[1] Schwan, Gesine: Members of withdrawal, in: Graf von Krockow, Christian and Clear, Peter: Parties in Crisis, 1986 Munich, p. 135 -145.
[2] There are also representatives who hold to a parliament and political parties understand and Liquid feedback only as a supplementary collective opinion of naming and Gesetzvorschlagungstool.
[3] It is unclear to me still, like governments, above all the necessary (political responsible) Minister and Secretaries of the ministries, are elected and how often their dismissal is possible.