Governing for the people by the people: eParty

Author: Richard Cowtan

What NEED does this meet?

Why? There is a real need for politics to be taken back by the people. Our sovereignity has been given over to governments for too long. By using the power and technology of the internet this project is about enabling citizens to take a more positive and inclusive approach to their day to day lives.

So What? A political Party: The eParty, like Labour, the Conservatives or the Lib dems. Unlike them, our manifesto is composed in an open and democratic way: at the heart of the organisation is the website, the online vote and administration by the many for the many.

What is the APPROACH?

Unlike many e-government initiatives, this proposal seeks to foster a culture of direct democracy in a country that has different ideals. Let the party be made up of individuals who all agree and want the same thing: more say in our political lives.

What are the BENEFITS to people?

The benefits are simply that citizens for the first time in a long time, will have a real tangible say on how the party will form policies and push them forward. A part of the party’s base credence is to push the adoption of technologies, where they fit with need into government and daily life, to make our society far more e-enabled. This can only benefit society as a whole.

What is the COMPETITION?

The main stream parties could easily adopt parts of what the eParty is about. Like so many things in the past – say environmentalism, they will only pay lip service to these ideas: they remain, behind it all a Left/right leaning organisation. the eParty’s tone/agenda is set by those that make up its membership. It is democracy in action.

What BUDGETS & LOGISTICS are required?

The website is on its own a real challenge: to ensure the right facilities are there to host ideas/ vote upon them, list members, have forums and user groups. This isn’t massively expensive.

The wider idea of a political party is of course expensive, but this can be grown as critical mass of members grows.

5 Comments

  1. For what its worth, the idea of a political party devoid of any ideological principle that just exists on the most base populist lines fills me with utter dread. By all means make political parties more open and democratic, but ultimately, democracy is about the competition of ideas. The idea of a single party as a repository for “all the people” to participate in was the foundation of Communist regimes in the 20th century: it didn’t work, and the internet won’t change that.

  2. Richard Cowtan

    In Reply To James Graham comment:

    The idea behind eParty is that it would have an ideological principle. it would whatever was on the minds of its public.

    I do have to agree that it does look quite communistic in its outlook, but the difference here is that the usual laws of democracy would be upheld and the rule of the party goverened in a much more direct and accountable way through the use of the internet. What’s more, the founddation of a direct style of democracy is not a precursor towards a differing mode of economics/society in general. The eParty fits in with the current ideology and enhances it, and does not seek to implement its own will on a populace.

  3. As a stunt to make established parties think more seriously about their own internal democratic structures, it’s a good idea. But as others have pointed out, politics is about people with a common interest (not necessarily ideology) rallying round a flag and fighting it out with others.

    An eParty would in practice simply reflect the diversity of interests and ideologies of the population at large. Thus, it would fragment instantly on establishing any concrete policies as a huge minority of its members would realise that they were supporting a cause contrary to their own interests.

    Point taken, though, that many people are deterred from involving themselves in politics not because they don’t believe in democracy but because the only parties capable of achieving power pay scant regard to their members’ priorities.