This post only expresses the opinion of the author
It has become clear at this point that there are different flavors to DiD. They range in methodologies, objectives and else. However, there is a strong commonality, the desire to use this working group to improve the quality of the democracy in DiEM25. Moreover, the idea of making of DiEM25 a truly grassroots democracy or at least reduce the power of the top structures in favor of more participation is almost unanimous. DiD has certain specific aims which have been agreed upon but I have a particular vision of DiD which of course encompasses those aims but goes far beyond them. Needless to say, my vision of DiD includes my vision for DiEM25. I try to summarize it in one sentence and then develop it further.
“DiD is the tool through which members of DiEM25 can orchestrate a profound change in DiEM25 structures which will result on an expansive democratic model which can be exported to other European parties, organizations and eventually regional, national and union institutions.”
This means, DiEM25 should be the epicenter of an expansive democratic movement which must be able to reach out to the entire European population. DiD should be the epicenter of a DiEm25 internal democratic movement whose aim is to convert the later in a truly grassroots movement.
Such transformation of the present DiEM25 structures would require a new set of Organizing Principles. However, any attempt to re drafts the OP’s before the grass roots of DiEM are truly articulated and able to take decisions in an efficient and democratic fashion will fail to support a truly grassroots movement. Grassroots democracy cannot be designed or imposed from the top. Grassroots democracy is a state of organization, a living system where people make rules, use the rules, change the rules within a certain framework and methodology which they also change as needed until sufficiently stable for the amount of people who use them, the people who take part in such democracy. If there are going to be DiEM25 Organizing Principles 2.0, these must be a mere description of an existing working organization not the blue print for a top down implementation. The organization principles of a grassroots democracy can only be a statement of facts, not a project.
How do we go from where we stand to where I would like to see ourselves is the trillion dollar question. There is no final answer to the question of how do 500.000.000 people can self organize democratically, but we are much more likely to be on track if we have manged to solve the problem for 5.000.000, for instance. In turn, how to solve that problem will be much easier if we have managed to have a self organizing group of 5.000 individuals. Let us say this is my vision of DiD’s role. Did should engage in the conversation about internal democracy with as many DiEM25 members as possible. The rules of this conversation will have to be modified as the number of participants change, and those rules mus be decided and approved by the group at any time. DiD itself does not need to grow. Only the conversation must grow.
For the conversation to grow organically it must involve a continuous revision of our methods, but also a steady work from our side in order to ensure that we live up to our own expectations. The dues payed to democracy will diminish as the size of our democracy grows, but now that we are few, a significant effort is required to move forward. There are three pillars of democracy upon which we need to build:
3.- Separation of powers
Our continuous discussion on what are the methods that make a DiD resolution legitimate must be translated into written rules and conditions. We have already started this process, but further procedures must be established for the different types of actions that DiD shall take as a group. These procedures must be drafted, discussed, approved, modified, which means a lot of work.
All of our work must be available to anyone who is interested in taking part in the game of democracy, which potentially includes everyone. Total transparency is demanded from whom expects total transparency. I personally believe we are in the right track, but we have not yet specified and approved which are the processes which guarantee we are totally transparent. Once we agree upon them we will need to establish who is responsible for carrying out such tasks. More work to be done.
Separation of powers.
Although we are so few, and there is little power to be separated in DiD, we need to start taking into consideration this critical issue. Democracy’s corner stone is separation of powers and we have very little idea of how a grassroots judicial system could look like, and how can it be made effective. It would be wise starting thinking about it now, from the very beginning, so it is inbuilt in the system and not superimposed on it.
Thus, I believe there is a lot of work needed to make the miracle of democracy possible, but I see a very clear path which stems from groups such such as DiD. There are probably hundreds if not thousands of groups which are now working on this same objective in Europe and beyond. Our aim is not to build our own little perfect democracy, but share with all of them, inside and outside DiEM25, our knowledge and our troubles, our solutions and our failures, in order to finally unite with them first in a truly paneuropean democracy and later we will see.
Salud, Paz y Democracia