Re: [ga] Successor agency. (was: Substance over rhetoric )

[Jefsey Morfin <jefsey@wanadoo.fr>]

On 03:14 21/03/02, Joop Teernstra said:
>At 18:37 20/03/02 -0500, Joanna Lane wrote:
>Do you have any illusion that brute financial and lobbying power is not 
>going to define the structures of a successor agency?

No. This is why we have to structure a consensus where that is structurally 
*prevented*. IMO it is possible, but it calls on constitutionalism and what 
I see on the lists with people thinking first about elections, committee, 
control, etc... seems so much out dated and irrealistic that I wander if 
this is only amateurism or if it is part of the human international nature.
But who knows?
jfc


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html