David Graeber on Participatory Democracy 2006 Part 2/2

[s0673451]

Chomskyan all your videos are fascinating.

[Xenu]

If there is a Western tradition (which I think there most certainly is) it is separated from Classical High Culture by almost a millennium, and is as much influenced by the intermediary 1st millennium Arabian culture as by the Classical tradition (Christianity, anyone?). 'Cultures' are of course ideal-types, since cross-pollination has always existed at the borders and aided growth. On 18th century Republicanism...

[Xenu]

... I think Mr. Graeber is downplaying the extent to which popular rule was debated by the revolutionaries. A Republic is simply a form of democratic governance at a larger scale. They extent to which a Republic fails to be democratic has nothing to do with the representative aspect of government but with the extent to which the economic arena is under democratic control. Local government is sometimes even less democratic than at the federal level because local government is easier to 'buy out.'

[marsCubed]

@Xenu Despite the fact that you placed 2 comments, it is difficult to see your point.

The A constitution was set up to give protections to capitalist property elites with attempts at standards which would protect the population.

This does not mean that it is a progressive system today.

In fact it is an obstacle to an egalitarian cooperative society.. which is defended as other capital models are often much worse, at least there is a sham of decency built in.

We could do much better.

[Xenu]

@marsCubed As I posted my comments over 2 years ago I can't quite recall its context and don't have time to rewatch the video. I don't disagree with your statement. I don't think the American constitution and representative democracy are synonymous, though. My point is that one can have a republican form of government under socialism as well. Representative democracy does not necessarily entail private control over public resources or the means of production.