|
Transparency and scale: limits of a traditional parliament at a global level
Tim GILMAN
Thursday, November 14, 2002 5:51 AM
[The author is refering the WCFs Common Statement on World Democracy, one of our work documents that can be visited at http://66.114.243.76/html/WorldDemocracyCommonStatement.asp.]
ºººProblems of transparence and representativity at a world scale are too
complex but not insurmountable. Anyway, if a traditional form of parliament
were to be created today to address problems of global scope, the idea of a
transparent world parliament would be sacrificed. Without transparency, a
world parliament would be subject to eventual takeover by global corporations.
In sum a world parliament emphasizing on transparency, will necessarily look
nothing like a traditional parliament.ººº
I'd like to address the idea of transparency in government. It seems obvious
that transparency in government is the best way to insure secret deals aren't
made, and that corruption is minimized. From reading through the background
world-parl documents, it appears most people agree that transparency is a
necessary requirement for any world parliament.
For myself, the idea of transparency means that a body of government is open
to inspection during any moment of it's proceedings. In a traditional sense
this might mean that I'd be allowed to sit in a gallery overlooking a session
of parliament, and perhaps write a letter to my representative. At best, I'd
become a whistle-blower if I discover an illegal act in the proceedings of a
world parliament.
But if the WCF's #1 Statement "Ultimate political sovereignty resides in
individuals" is to remain true, then any citizen of the world must be able to
review and participate in the proceedings of the world parliament. This
requirement implies that a world parliament must be accessible to all
citizens, across the entire planet, all the time. This also means that if half
the world's population wants to speak out regarding a certain global topic,
the "floor" of the world parliament must be able to accommodate and implicitly
organize billions of voices into some enormous form of dialogue.
I don't mean to exaggerate. I firmly believe that once the requirements for a
world parliament are fully articulated, a solution will present itself. In
the above example, say only a fraction of the world's population is
participating in the world parliament. That would leave only a million or so
people getting together to address some specific problem.
How do a million people get together to address a specific problem? How can
this be done in such a way that any citizen can go through the historical
records of a million people getting together to solve a problem? How can this
be done when one hundred problems are being solved in parallel?
I don't think problems of this scale and complexity are insurmountable. But I
think that if a traditional form of parliament were to be created today to
address problems of global scope, the idea of a transparent world parliament
would be sacrificed. Without transparency, a world parliament would be
subject to eventual takeover by global corporations, and then the world would
be in really bad shape.
In sum I feel a world parliament that addresses the WCF's Common Statement on
World Democracy, and it's emphasis on transparency, will necessarily look
nothing like a traditional parliament. There simply is not a room big enough
on the planet to hold that many representatives.
Tim Gilman
WP21 Alliance Forum on a World Parliament for the 21st Century
E-mail : world-parl@forums.alliance21.org
Fax 1 717 264 5036
Information, inscriptions, désinscriptions: germa@alliance21.org
|
|
|
english ·original·
[FORUM]
[DISCUSSION]
[SYNTHESES]
[DOCUMENTS]
[CALENDAR]
[PARTICIPANTS]
[SUBSCRIBE]
[CONTACT]
[HOME]