{The WorldVoter}. May 2010, Issue #27 of The WorldVoter

[The WorldVoter]

Hello from Vote World Parliament.

To view this month's newsletter as a .pdf file (nicer, easier to read
formatting with hotlinks), please click on one of the links below, or
copy/paste it in your browser...

http://www.rescueplanforplanetearth.com/WorldVoterNewsletter26.pdf or
http://www.voteworldparliament.org/about/newsletter/

Ted Stalets
Vice President
Vote World Parliament

-------------------------------------------------------------

The WorldVoter
the newsletter of
Vote World Parliament
— democratic world parliament through a global referendum —

www.VoteWorldParliament.org
Vote World Parliament President is Jim Stark; Vice President is Ted
Stalets
www.RescuePlanForPlanetEarth.com
This site, above, is for the companion book Rescue Plan for Planet
Earth

Issue #27, May, 2010
(This issue and all previous issues are posted at
http://voteworldparliament.org/about/newsletter/)

THE SCORE

As of May 14, 2010, 21,313 people have voted.
So far, the votes are 95.5% in favor of creating a democratic world
parliament.

Quotes of the month

If a world government emerges in the future, it has to be democratic
and guided by universal spiritual and moral values. This [global]
referendum may help in the quest for that goal. Chandra Muzaffar,
Global Ethic or Global Hegemony?: Reflections on Religion, Human
Dignity and Civilisational Interaction

A different world cannot be built by indifferent people. A Google
search revealed that there are many people this quote is attributed
to, including Henry David Thoreau, Horace Mann and Peter Marshall
(some just say it is just a famous proverb)


News in brief

VWP’s draft UN resolution handed in person to Asim Iffkhar Ahmad,
Deputy Chef de Cabinet of the President of the General Assembly

Francisco Plancarte is a lawyer in Mexico, and he is also a VP of Vote
World Parliament for International Affairs. This February, he met with
Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, Deputy Chef de Cabinet of the President of the
General Assembly (H.E. Dr. Ali Abdussalam Treki), and handed him a
printed copy of our hoped-for UN resolution (to read that text, please
go to http://voteworldparliament.org/allies-initiatives/draft-un-resolution/).
I am now in the first phase of a dialogue with Mr. Ahmad in this
regard. My first substantive email to him was on the important
question of whether the mandate from a “successful” global referendum
would be accepted as legally binding under international law. Chapter
10 of Rescue Plan for Planet Earth argues that it must be accepted as
legally binding, though if it is not accepted as such, that would not
be a showstopper, because a global mandate from 50% of human adults
with at least 67% of all votes in the “yes” column would be accepted
as “politically binding” in any event. (Chapter 11 covers that
discussion.)

* * *

Bolivian conference to promote a global referendum on climate change
(from http://www.worldvotenow.com/news/68-global-democracy-is-born.html)

by Joel Marsden

May 6, 2010 – La Paz

The World People’s Conference today took the historic step of
announcing the immediate construction of the first global democratic
system.

Over 35,000 delegates including governments, social movements and
indigenous rights groups from 140 countries attended the summit held
in Bolivia. The official declaration pledges to “Support and promote a
world plebiscite or referendum on climate change open to the global
public.” With this statement, a completely new chapter in the arena of
international politics has started.

The idea for this global referendum on climate change was first
proposed by President Evo Morales during the failed climate talks in
Copenhagen (COP15), when it became painfully clear that there was no
democratic decision-making process at the global level. The World
People’s Conference now formalizes this world vote by forming
international and national committees to directly organize the event.

Amalia Cuaquira, who was elected co-chair of the Referendum Initiative
with Joel Marsden, points out the challenges ahead. “We have to take
local customs and practices into consideration, so that we can include
every man and woman in this global referendum.”

“The first step is the definition of the referendum questions
themselves,” said Marsden. “The global referendum will completely
change the power structure in the world. We have to do it right from
the beginning.”

The global referendum can be held using a mixture of national voting
infrastructure, the web, mobile phones and civil society networks.
Under one plan, the global referendum could be held on the UN approved
“Mother Earth Day” on April 22, but if this is possible as soon as in
2011 or 2012 has been left up to the international and national
committees to decide upon.

“Look at something as revolutionary as a global referendum that
President Morales proposed,” said President Hugo Chavez. “Venezuela
will join the effort immediately. We all just have to get together and
organize it.”

The above was written by Joel Marsden, writer-producer-director of
World Vote Now, a documentary film about the possibility of building a
global democracy (see www.worldvotenow.com). Opinions expressed in
this article are his, and do not necessarily reflect those of VWP or
The WorldVoter.

NOTES: In an article entitled “A New Climate Movement in Bolivia,”
published in The Nation on April 21, 2010, Naomi Klein reports that “…
as Jim Shultz of the Democracy Center pointed out, the working group
on the [global] referendum apparently spent more time arguing about
adding a question on abolishing capitalism than on discussing how in
the world you run a global referendum.” It will be a great shame if
this Bolivian initiative is turned into Cold War II. In short, if we
accept that we must abolish capitalism to stop climate change, then
climate change will never be stopped. [For the entire Naomi Klein
article, go to http://www.thenation.com/article/new-climate-movement-bolivia.]
Also, it is normal that a referendum has one question only, so
consideration of multiple questions is not a widely-supported idea.
That approach might reduce the Bolivian exercise to the level of an
opinion poll rather than a true referendum. Ed.

* * *

National sovereignty and the creation of a democratic world parliament

A short analysis by Jim Stark

The great obstacle to the creation of a world parliament or government
is an antiquated conception of what sovereignty is. Many people have
not thought through or studied the concept. Most people find it
surprising that the reality of “national sovereignty” dates back only
to 1648, a few hundred years ago, to the signing of the Treaty of
Westphalia (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_of_Westphalia).

Hundreds of thousands of years ago, when our ancestors were cave-
dwellers, every single human being was “sovereign” in that he or she
could take whatever he or she wanted, kill whatever or whomever he or
she pleased, at least insofar as he or she could get away with it.
Philosophically, sovereignty resides in and arises from the people,
and that conception is written into the constitutions of many or most
democratic nation-states. What happened is that we individuals (not
always very democratically or very willingly, at first) assigned the
exercise of aspects of our sovereignty to other bodies—to municipal,
provincial, and national governments, and to their agencies, like the
police, etc. We did this for our own good, and the great majority of
us insist on the permanence of this arrangement even if it displeases
a small minority of law-breakers. So, the global democracy movement is
not so much asking all nation-states to give up some of their
sovereignty as we are seeking to get humanity to re-assign the
exercise of some aspects of our sovereignty to a new body, call it a
world parliament or a world government.

This debate, meaning whether the cure for what ails us globally is a
world government or “just” a world parliament, is usually overplayed
and is somewhat beside the point in any event. However you slice this
reality, we need enforceable world law just as badly as we need
enforceable national, provincial and municipal law. It is simply
naive, and arguably suicidal, not to face up to this. We know that
nation-states will protest loudly, but if the entire human race
decides to set up a global political institution that will allow human
life to survive and thrive for thousands of millennia into the future
(by passing a referendum ballot authorizing the creation of a
democratic world parliament), nation-states will surely continue on as
before, operating within their jurisdictions, but “supranational”
issues like climate change and war will be dealt with by a process
that includes a world parliament. In other words, if humanity votes on
that option, and the referendum result is a very clear “yes,” then we
will surely build what we voted for (no matter who whines).

In short, you are as sovereign as you choose to be. No one should want
to go back to the rules of the jungle, where it is basically eat or be
eaten, as that is not in anyone’s interest, nor will it work when one
adds in the power-expanding consequences of technology (an angry or
insane Neanderthal with a big club is one thing—a barking mad Homo
sapiens with a nuke or an anthrax culture is quite another). But as a
somewhat sovereign human being, you are entirely free to make sure
that the global referendum is conducted, and you would be well advised
not to assume that it will pass. I think it’s going to be a very tough
fight, but I also think we can win it. I also think that if we fail to
make all this happen, our species will be rendered extinct, by our own
hand, and quite possibly in the next 100 or 200 years.

* * *

Vimy Ridge,
Windsor Star editorial for April 9.
http://www.windsorstar.com/opinion/forget+birth+nation/2903501/story.html

By Larry Kazdan

Canadians should remember Vimy Ridge, not just because the birth of
our nation was forged in blood there, but because the deaths of 3,598
soldiers and the serious wounding of another 7,004 demonstrate the
folly of those who romanticize war as a means of resolving conflict
between nations.

Thousands of young men died in a “war to end all wars.” But ending war
requires the transformation of our international system so that
disputes are resolved by political means rather than through military
force.

The threat of a general war in Europe has receded because new
institutions such as the European Union have diverted disputes away
from the battlefield and into judicial and legislative channels.

If we really want to honour those who fought and died for freedom, let
Canada lead in the promotion of better global governance that will not
only reduce the risk of conflict, but help nations co-operate in
solving the myriad social, economic and environmental problems that
threaten us all.

A parliamentary assembly at the United Nations, for example, would
enlarge the scope for democracy, would help foster consciousness of
ourselves as part of a global community, and would be a lever for
further urgent reforms.

Larry Kazdan,
Vancouver, B.C.

Editor’s note:

When I asked permission to use Larry’s column in The WorldVoter, he
wrote back to say: “Of course, Jim. And feel free to add my message:
‘A real [world] parliament would be even better [than a UN
parliamentary assembly]! Go Vote World Parliament Go!’”

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "The WorldVoter" group.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
theworldvote...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/theworldvoter?hl=en