New Direct Democracy - Government Revamp Theory:

March 17th, 2008, 10:08 AM

As Requested:

NDD ~ or Neo (New) Direct Democracy - September 13th, 2006 – Concept B-1:

There are many different types of Democracy. Some work by electing representatives for the people, and there are other’s that allow the direct opinions and decisions to fall on the citizens of the community. I am going to delve into the original “Direct Democracy” and attempt to improve on this idea.

#1 Original Definition of Direct Democracy:

Direct democracy is a political system where the people vote on all policy decisions, such as questions of whether to approve or reject various laws. It is called direct because the power of making decisions is exercised by the people directly, without intermediaries or representatives. Historically, this form of government has been rare because of the difficulties of getting all the people of a certain territory in one place for the purpose of voting. Criticism is also drawn upon the use of this term for it implies the notion of voting, while it neglects other democratic procedures such as speech and press and civic organizations. That is, these critics argue that democracy is more than merely a procedural issue.

All direct democracies to date have been relatively small communities; usually city-states. The most notable was the ancient Athenian democracy. Today, a limited direct democracy exists in some Swiss cantons that practice it in its literal form. The extensive use of referenda, as in California, is akin to direct democracy.

#2 Original Definition of Communism:

Communism is the political, social, and economic system of certain countries in which the state, governed by a single party without formal opposition, owns all property, control the production and distribution of goods and services, and, to a great extent, control the social and cultural life of the people.

~ To understand the following concepts and ideas, you must first understand the differences between the two most common governments in today’s world. Some of the following ideas I have shown previously have been told to me by some, that they are geared as Communist, however these people did not understand what true Communism is and what Democracy is suppose to be. One of my primary concepts is to remove the concept of currency from the aspect of life, both from those in political positions and the citizens they represent. Although those who have criticized this idea directly thought the concept was Communist, that political idea was still based on the government having the control over currency, therefore having the power over the country. Removing currency all together will bring a further balance between the representatives and the people they represent. Without the concept of money/power, which goes hand in hand, the only thing that would remain is to better the collective of society, the planet we live on and yourself.

Goals:
- No Currency
- Free Healthcare
- Free Education
- Everyone can work the job they dreamed
- Live for Recognition, not Money
- Global Career Recording
- Home over every Head
- No Prisons (as we know them)
- Less Crime Laws
- Legalized but Monitored Drugs
- Global Unity
- Real Democratic Decisions
- Improve way of life while keeping it familiar

NO CURRENCY –

The main problem with today’s world is Money. People want more money, so they can live easier; have more possessions, and more power. It is the current way of keeping order and control in the world. It is the way you trade goods and services. The World currently lives off of money. “Money Makes the World go Round”

This way of thinking must end, in order for Earth, and human to survive. Currency was invented back in around 2250 BC, and is an old way of trading which needs to be updated and evolved.

If suddenly money became worthless and you could no longer get paid for the job you do, what would you do? If there is no money, how do you get goods and services? This answer is covered in another section.

FREE HEALTHCARE –

A person’s health is the up most important. Why should people sit in waiting rooms for hours? Why should someone have to pay to get healed? When you are injured or need medical attention, it’s usually important. Also, how come it seems like some doctors and nurses just don’t care and it seems like they are just rushing you through, just to get on with their day? It’s because they took the job and the career, based on what would give them the most money and security in their lives. To some, it’s just a job.

But this happens in all jobs and businesses. You will always get that person who just doesn’t care, and they are just there for the money. Then if there is no money or pay, then what would be the purpose of having that career? More of this will be answered further down.

FREE EDUCATION –

Why? Because ignorance is not bliss. Many people who take small paying jobs, or jobs they don’t enjoy, is because they can’t afford the education they need to do the job they really want to do in their lives. Humans are on this planet to learn and explore, so why limit this to only those who can afford it? Those who can afford it, usually just take it, because it will give them more money down the road. They may not want to do it out of enjoyment, but if the money is there, then who cares?

With free education, anybody who wanted to do something with their talents, can do so and get a job in the field they trained in, because they’ll be more apt to do a better job, because they care, rather then the guy motivated by money. With no currency and free education, it would lead up to people choosing what they want in life, they’ll have more possibilities, more self esteem, more happiness in their lives.

EVERYBODY CAN WORK THE JOB THEY DREAMED –

Quite frankly, if there was no money motivation, then there would be fewer situations of people trying to take what another has, because everybody would be on the same level. Every job in the world is just as important as the next. The guy who runs the power plant, the guy who cleans up the building at night, the people flipping burgers for your meal, to the guy keeping all the planes in the air. Every job should be considered equally important and with that, those who enjoy what they do (For whatever reason) should feel proud of their job. There would always be someone to do a job, or the job wouldn’t exist.

Once you had the education, and once you found a place to live and settle down, you can look for a job in your living area that relates to your expertise. Those who you apply to will see your work history and your past work and as long as you keep your interest in the job you do and love, then there would be no reason not to hire you.

If you lose interest in the career you took, just go and learn something new. Life is about learning. Nobody can be expected to know what they want to do with their lives right away. Sometimes it has to be trial and error.

LIVE FOR RECONITION NOT MONEY / GLOBAL CAREER RECORDING-

With the job that you do, there would be a global recording system made, kind of like your Social Insurance Number, but more dynamic. With each job you get hired onto, and every college degree you take, it would all be recorded into a personal database for employers and yourself to view at anytime. History like your marks in the courses you took, the jobs you worked on and samples of each would all be stored on your account, so that when you look back on your life, you’ll be able to see everything you worked on, and it’d be stored under your name in the future, never to be forgotten. Family members and friends who want to learn about you, can access your database after your passing away, so that they would have some form of record of your life.

You would go down in history, without being forgotten, which is the core urge for all humans. Not to be forgotten when they are gone.

Employers and other people would be able to place in note and references into this database as well, commenting on your performance and personality, etc.

HOME OVER EVERY HEAD-

With everybody working or learning, everyone would be contributing to society in one way or another. Since there would be no money, everyone would be able to have a house, or apartment, no matter what your income would have been.

Those who are in school are bettering themselves, which in turn, will better the rest of society when they finally start to work. Those who work are doing so already. How would you cover bills? How would you get food?

You just go into your job like every other day and go home like every other day. Except you don’t waste time with bills. Power is still running in your home, the TV is still on. You have your vehicle, and you have your bus drivers. Life would continue on, like it does now, but with a lot of other stresses gone.

There will always be the person who enjoys diving cabs, being police, flying airplanes, keeping the power flowing, cleaning up, fixing your shoes, or glasses. Those people’s reward: The thanks and Credit where credit is due.

“This guy makes the best pizzas!” “This guy can draw amazingly!” ~ If the credit and the recognition are not adequate for the person, then perhaps they are not in the job position they truly want to be in and are still finding themselves. The support is there for these people to get them where they want to be.

The other thing is art, acting and music. They are also considered contribution to society. Without the arts, there is no humanity. Those who wish to take up art in any way will still feel secure that they are contributing to society and will be remembered.

As long as you are contributing to society and you are bettering yourself at the same time, then you have a roof over you head. If you have no job and find it difficult to help out in society, there will always be those who enjoy helping you find the career for you.

For those who can not decide on a career, would be placed in a temp job somewhere, like McDonalds or some other “Unimpressive” Career, in order to help them realize they don’t want to do that with their lives and make them think of something better quick. Teenagers and those who are just getting into work would be placed in the un-popular jobs, until they figure out what they want to do.

NO PRISONS (AS WE KNOW THEM)-

With a society like this, those who were in prison for crimes in the past would have to be released (depending.) But not before training for entering a new world. They would have to realize that money is no more, and be taught what the big picture means for them. They no longer have to rob, deal drugs, or anything else for that matter, if they were in for lack of education and money.

Those who murder and commit more serious crimes would require special treatment and weather or not they could contribute to a new society, would remain to be seen.
There would be prisons in a sense, because you can never remove crime 100% but these would not be the prisons one would imagine they would be. For those who commit crimes in the new government would still face a trial and dealt with as appropriately as possible. Since in this new society, current laws and how to approach them would be reformed, and in the long run there would be a lot less types of crimes to deal with, therefore prison population would theoretically be smaller. These prisons would also actually be true “Correctional Facilities” where instead of being isolated for years, weeks and months without proper rehabilitation, and the general promotion of further criminal behavior from other inmates, there will be support there for them, so they can realize that they are not a lost cause. Additional details for extreme cases still remains to be organized.

LESS CRIME LAWS–

Within time, society may evolve into something that may not require crime or laws at all. Everyone would be able to get what they want, when they need it, they can do whatever they want in their lives, so long as it doesn’t interfere with another’s.

With everyone doing what they want with their lives, without the worries of money, then why would they commit crimes?

Once again, there will still be the Mentally Disturbed and people who may become serial killers, because the cause of these is still unknown or in the grey area of understanding, but with people who are passionate of their careers in the Military, Police and security, then you should feel confident that the best of society will track them down and protect you.

LEGALIZED BUT MONITORED DRUGS-

We all know that with the majority of laws dropped, money being gone, and freedom being explored further, there would be no need for laws against drugs. Everything from Caffeine to Crack would then become legal, however proper research and tests would have to be taken place on all drugs, and made known to the public, all pros and cons of each. Once again, education should be free and open.

Drugs are a personal thing, and at 18 years of age, nobody should be told what they can and can not do with their lives and their bodies. That’s what life is, personal experience, lessons and natural selection. The education would be there for them, and if they misuse that information, or don’t use it, then they will learn the hard way, and others will learn from their mistakes.

Programs will have to be out there to help people manage what they do. Some people like to drink a lot, and others like to go to a trance bar and dance with E. All experiences should be allowed, but help should always be there, so you don’t feel alone and you can take back your life, if worse case comes. With responsibility finally thrown into each and everyone’s hands, and the full spectrum of understanding is given to them about the consequences of their actions, society will no longer be treated as children under the government who don’t know what is best for them, when actually they do.

GLOBAL UNITY-

This method of government could work for one country, or the entire planet, if one so wished.

Some may wonder, “Ok, so your country has no currency, so how do you trade with other countries that still use money?”

Each country has a value in their lands, or something that another country can use. What you would do is something like this situation:

Let’s say Canada dropped currency. Now Canada exports lumber, fresh water, and many other things around the globe. If we were going to trade with the U.S., then what we would do is calculate the value (Money wise) of the amount of vehicles or computers we are to get from the US. Instead of paying for them, we do a goods trade, and say “We’ll take X amount of vehicles at this cost, and we’ll give your country X amount of lumber or water to this company in your country. The money they would pay us, just get them to pay the vehicle company. That way, their money is still flowing, they still get what they needed, and we get what we needed and all is balanced.

If a country did not want to trade this way, then too bad. Humans do not require things from other countries to live. Maybe to make things easier in life, but a country can still survive on it’s own with this system of government. If a country will not give you something you really need, because you would not trade currency, then you get your Scientists (Who enjoy their career and are there because they are the best) to help find alternatives to keep you going.

We all have to look out for one another and make each other’s lives better.

REAL DEMOCRATIC DECISIONS-

Along with the Global Employment Records for each person, they would be issued their own hand-held devices for voting on the fly and making decisions that will affect their society and country.

First thing would be to remove all politicians from the government and replace them with all new officials who are interested in making their country and the people in it, better and happier, not for money and a comfy place in life. These new politicians would not be in any position of real power, since the real power would be of the people for once. These new politicians would be mediators, to voice the majority of people they are run by.

If there are issues of health, or construction required for a location, the party member of that location would receive notification of a new official poll made up by the community, and would voice this poll to the political collective, and receive assistance from across the country, when needed.

When a party member seems to not be doing their job correctly, there are no 4 year waits for election, if the majority wishes for them to be replaced. Once again, all of this would be done by the hand-held devices, each person would be issued.

With today’s technology, it is possible to create these devices, or the necessary programs and tools required can be easily implemented into the common cell phone.

Political party members would consist of people who are interested in the people around them, care for their community and will do what is best for the majority.

No spur of the moment decisions would be made by this party. Ideas may arise, but must be presented to the country and approved by the people. 24 hour voting processes would have to be in place. Each day, you would check your Voting device and a list of decisions would be on them. If you did not have time to go through them at a part in the day, you would have 24 hours to place your vote, before the polls are closed and the final decision is made.

Pure Democracy, AKA: Direct Democracy, unlike today’s government, where you vote someone in, and they just start making decisions on their own and you got to suck it up.

IMPROVED WAY OF LIFE WHILE KEEPING IT FAMILIAR-

With all of this in place, the system would work in upon itself, maintaining the society, and keeping everyone happy. Changes maybe noticeable right away in life, but still remain similar to what we are used to.

You go about your work day. You work whatever hours are required (8 hours max) and the rest of the day and the weekends are yours.

In order to keep people from taking more then they need in society:

Each person who works in society, would be entitled to one 2 week vacation a year, and allowed to travel anywhere they like in the world. Pilots and other crew, who enjoy their jobs, would love to take you to a nice resort somewhere, and let you explore the planet. Vacations can be added up, and you can take a year off if you liked.

Every 5 years, you are allowed to take 1 year off from study and work, to explore and better yourself and the planet.

Each person in society would be entitled to one luxury item per month, be that a car, or a stereo, etc. to help build their lives to what they dreamed. When starting a new home and family, you are allowed to get the basics required in a home to live (Couch, TV, Bed, Fridge, etc.) and accumulate more items down the road.

Food and Groceries – Each week, the amount you are allowed would be based on your household and health, which all would be stored on the Career Database, with everything else. Every month, you are allowed to get extra, if you wanted to hold a party or get together. Those households that are recorded as taking more then the average would be investigated into and addressed.



And that’s all I can think of right now. This is a work in progress, created by Praxius (Real Name Pending on Original Article) Any and all constructive opinions or suggestions are welcome. Society can not develop with just one person. It takes us all, and one person does not have all the answers.

March 17th, 2008, 10:10 AM

Lots to read, but for those interested, give it a gander, add some ideas, remove some ideas, do whatever.

March 17th, 2008, 11:57 AM

You must understand something about Direct Democracy..............most people are simply NOT willing to get involved to the necessary degree on a day-to-day basis.............we have only about 2/3 of eligible voters casting a ballot once every two to five YEARS!

What that means is that ONLY those individuals VERY interested in the topic and proposals at hand will bother voting......this will skew results to an extreme.

Let me give you an example......DD is much like on-line polls when it comes to participation.........I've seen dozens of on-line polls on gun control.....but only the gun nuts vote........because, with very few exceptions, only they care about the issue to any real extent. I have NEVER seen an on-line poll in which ANY gun control law was supported by more than 10% of respondents......therefore, with DD, you can forget Canadian gun control.......we'll all be packing heat.

Now, that makes me VERY happy......but I never suffered any delusions that I was in the majority on the subject.

That's the first flaw........there are more I don't have time to deal with now....I'm off to work.

March 17th, 2008, 12:50 PM

Fair enough, but considdering our current method of government doesn't seem to solve this problem either, I don't see this as a major concern.

As an example, the last budget that passed with hardly any of the Liberals bothering to show up to cast their vote (I think 11 Liberals showed up in total) the bill pretty well had no chance of failing a pass. Those idiot Liberals, as a case in point, were supposed to do their job and vote on the bill yes or no.... by doing nothing, they represented nobody's interests and shouldn't even be given a damn pay cheque covering those hours they were supposed to be "Working" for us (Or those who voted them in their seats at least.)

Then you have to considder why those people you pointed out do not vote. If they are like me, then chances are they figure it's a waste of time to vote in these parties into power, because they're all the same, they always promise you everything under the sun, that they'll change how we live for the better..... then they get into power and realize everything is screwed up from the last government, and they can't keep their promises, start jacking taxes up, cutting funding for things they themselves deem as not important (While others may disagree) and before you know it.... it's the same crap we're going through as we did with the previous government, and we do the same thing again in 4 or so years and nothing changes.

Then you also have to considder that the people who do not vote, do not feel they have any representation to the interests they personally have for their lives and their communities. If anything, all they have to vote for is who will cut them the best deal. With that kind of system, why bother? They'll get into power and do whatever they please no matter who we vote for or what they tell us.

I myself have just recently started voting, where I spent the last 10 years or so of my voting rights doing nothing, because there wasn't anything to be done. I then started to vote to see if my opinions would change.... Nope.... so I come up with this plan.

The problem in which you pointed out would be greatly reduced by this new method, and even if everyone did not vote in total on a patiuclar question/poll/bill, etc.. there would still be a decently represented portion of society which was interested in the mentioned program to vote, therefore they should still have rights to their votes counting on something.

If the selected amount of actual votes comes well below the registered population of the country which is eligable to vote, then the existing votes are recorded, the bill/poll is held off until the next day and then made a priority amongst the next cast of decisions. With the proper system in place where people can view these decisions and their details by a point/click method (Like how we read the news online) then one can be quickly informed on the details, and make a logical decision based on supplied information.

If paticular information is not provided, a request is of course available for that information and it would be the job of the government to seek out that information and provide it from expert sources who were also determined by the collective, not the government itself.

Considdering that every citizen would have access to their own polling interface on their desired technology (Cell phone, Computer, an ATM-like Terminal) all that would be required is about 10-15 mins a day to skim through the information and click yes or no on the paticular subject. Not only would people have more desire for this method of representation over one person deciding for hundreds or thousands of us, be more accurate based on numbers of people voting.... it would also speed up time in Parlament, considdering the parties will waste a week or month debating and moaning over one thing as it is now...... and then when it comes time to vote, as in the above example, many might not even vote anyways and just walk out (Liberals)

^ So if that's the case, then what's the difference?

In either system, current or the above new one, how would you suggest this problem be resolved?

March 17th, 2008, 02:18 PM

We can't have any form of "democracy" in the consumer world. As long as the conditioning exists that leaves people believing that they're "living the good life" by living in five bedroom homes, driving SUVs and living on a wallet full of credit cards....democracy is a myth.

Do you honestly think that anyone living on the 25th floor of a high-rise has the option of not using an electric closthes dryer? Do you honestly believe that "education" is something available to a family living on "minimum-wage" earnings (even if that family has two or three income-earners)?

Understand something here folks....

The age of "freedom" and the mysticism of "democracy" is gone....and it's been gone for a very long time.

March 17th, 2008, 03:07 PM

Which is why I did not include a form of Capitalism in this method of government. The above explains that the majority of the problems and corruption in todays government and society has to directly to do with Capitalism/Consumer World as you put it.... if you bothered to read anything above, you might have noticed this.

You clearly didn't even bother to read the topic/Post #1 to see how these things are resolved. Until you do, I won't bother to respond any further to your comments and filling up wasted space.

Read the document and relate to something specific in it, or just don't bother to post at all. I don't require some generic "We can't do anything because we're screwed" posts. If you want to do that, by all means start another thread.

I don't want you're opinion on democracy, or whatever you wish to think about.... I want to know about the supplied system's processes, if they have a possible function, if they will work or not, and why. Or do you yourself have an alternative method you wish to contribute?

If you're going to be one of those people to bitch and moan that we the people can not do anything about the situation we currently are living, then go somewhere else, because I heard and seen it all, I don't give a rats ass about your pessimistic and beaten attitudes. For those who do want something to start and work off of.... by all means, here's something at the very least to start with.

READ POST NUMBER 1 PRIOR TO POSTING SO THAT YOU MAKE SENSE IN THIS THREAD*

March 17th, 2008, 04:00 PM

This is basically anarchism but in the socialist vein and under a new name, which is probably a good idea. There are models for "direct democracies" which are less liberal and such choice should be left to the inhabitants; so as long as this "direct democracy" guarantees only human liberty and does not seek to limit us with constitutions or charters I think it sounds great. It should be based on liberty, contract and social norms and specifically in that order (Godwin). Also the punishment of criminals should only be what restores liberty and dignity to the victim since owing restitutions to the state means enslavement (Bakunin). Restitution can only be made to the victim if the victim is free otherwise restitution is being made to the victims owner. Restitution can also be made to the victims kin group and community at large as this does not denote ownership but a dignified place within those groups who's absence is a violation of the groups liberty; that is every individual persons liberty within that group.

March 17th, 2008, 10:38 PM

"Read the document and relate to something specific in it, or just don't bother to post at all. I don't require some generic "We can't do anything because we're screwed" posts. If you want to do that, by all means start another thread."

I see your flavor of "democracy" is quite similar to the current strain of politics as carried on in Canada and the United States.

It goes like this....

"I'll tell you what you can think should think and will think..... and if you don't play by my rules then feel free to leave..."

Your "ideas" are fine..... offer us an argument that would demonstrate how these "ideas" could be made actual and not the flights of fancy you'd sell as yet another "solution".

You wouldn't like my "solution" because it would demand something of you and everyone else here that you nor they are prepared to do.

Stop playing the game.

Perhaps you've studied history and perhaps you haven't but all your wonderful ideas don't amount to piss on a flat rock if they're impossible to achieve.

Go for it.....

Tell us all how you're going to convince everyone/anyone that orderly peaceful change can be made.

I'm vibrating in anticipation of your enlightened strategy....

March 18th, 2008, 07:03 AM

Well being honest the crimes/criminal dealings are still in the air for what I've been looking at... that's one of the things in this I felt needed some alternative views on to actually work so everyone/most are satisfied that it will not just work, but produce actual justice. Heck if most would just like to put a bullet in the head of a repeat ofender.... who am I to argue?

But my original views on how this structure would work, is that a set of laws would replace the current ones (Everyone of them) to what the majority feel the justice should be for that paticular thing. Drugs, prostitution, ownership of firearms, drinking ages, etc.

Instead of continually adding more and more laws on top of existing ones or to counter others, the existing laws would be thrown back into debate and re-voted on, as perhaps what we considdered a good idea during our time, our children's society maybe different and choose otherwise...... it would be their time, their country, their say. No additional laws stacked on people to be oppressed, just a solidification and confirmation on the existing ones and if they are still actually needed or are they causing more harm then good? In order to determine when these sort of things need to be thrown back into debate and re-voted, will be determined by the level of interest by the collective of the country (or local town/city, depending on the laws or where they affect most.)

March 18th, 2008, 09:24 AM

Wrong, but feel free to try again. This is the topic I am interested in debating and talking about.... which is why I started it in the first place. I am using the forums as they were ment to be used (To debate topics) and unless you are going to relate something to the topic at hand and actually show that you read something to actually relate to in the debate, it is simply a waste of time, nothing more. These forums are not a Democracy, so why should I act like one just because I am talking about one?

All I am asking is if someone wants to complain and say something above sucks or won't work, then provide a reasonable explination as to why... I didn't think it would be that much to be asking.

One step at a time. That has also been throught of, and a method does exist, but I wanted to see if this was plausable and agreed by most prior to thinking about taking action on it. There's no point in taking action on something nobody wants to have in their lives.

Unless you explain what it is, you will never truly know what I or anybody else is prepared to do.

I think you misunderstood my intentions.

Once again, one thing at a time. First.... besides it all being lovely and such to you, do you feel most would want this sort of change? No matter which way you plan on taking action, people must believe in the reasons for those actions. Once the reasons and principles are held by the majority as being the right approach, then proper action can be decided....

One can talk about revolution, riots, take overs, forceful/military action, or any peaceful actions, but if the foundation is weak for any of it, it'll fail before it begins (Many of today's incidences are a good example of this)

Believe me, I would not have wasted my time on the above methods and writting it all out in detail, as well as share it with other people, if I was not also planning methods of it actually being implimented into action. That'd just be a foolish waste of time now wouldn't it?

March 18th, 2008, 11:58 AM

Praxius, there are some ideas you should consider:

1. Division Of Labor ?
That idea has allowed some of us to specialize in our fields of interest. Does the athlete take time to farm ? Does the Doctor need to be a fireman ? Do artists need to do traffic control work ? Not all of us are interested enough to follow politics and perhaps are better left out of the polling booths for lack of knowledge. Division of Labor has allowed for specialization, invention and a bigger economic pie for all. If we all had to use most of our day persuing or acquiring food, not much time would be left for any other creative or useful endeavors.

In California there are so many ballot questions sometimes, that few voters, even the more informed ones mis-understand the wording, much less the issue. This kind of direct democracy misunderstands the value of DIVISION OF LABOR. It is why we select people to pay attention to issues. This is REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY.

2. Tyranny of the Mob.
This is why most Democracies have a bill of rights, a list of civil liberties that are protected from majority rule. This over-emphasis on voting needs further examination. The majority or plurality vote is the least important aspect of democracy, when compared to the laws protecting our rights, and our property. The institutions of the judiciary, and legislature can also protect us against the fascist nature of MOB RULE. Tyranny of the MOMENT is also a scary situation that only cooler more educated people in the matter of governing can control. Fads and zeitgeist often comprise the TYRANNY OF THE MOMENT, with no perspective on the long landscape of history.

In fact George Orwell had it right, but had the source of our demise all wrong. He saw the right of privacy being curtailed by government, the traditional bogeyman. But look around you. The real culprit on stealing privacy is THE PEOPLE. Your wife wants immediate access to you. The Cell Phone. She also wants to know where you are at any time she desires. The GPS. So does your boss want this. And you want it of your children.
3. REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY. This idea is related to DIVISION OF LABOR. But there's an additional issue here. There is the often classic debate whether we should desire 100 percent representation of our whims or whether we should desire LEADERSHIP, which is a much admired trait that does not often "follow" the will or whim of the people.

4. STARTING OVER, RE-INVENTING THE WHEEL. Why? We would begin the process all over again and end up where we are now most likely, with pendulum swings reacting to each new wave of change. The issues of society are not simple. Oh you often hear otherwise, but there are many reasons why we are where we are now. Why not draw from history over the vast reaches of time to learn what people encountered and thought ? Has History no use for you ?

5. THE ESSENTIAL FRICTION AND DIS-SATISFACTION IN DEMOCRACY.
Give this a little thought here. It's not a really bad thing. But happiness and conformity and satisfaction are little found in democracy. Democracy is a bunch of individuals in constant disagreement, each spouting off their treasured opinions and becoming quite distraught if you disagree because opinions are like pets and people don't like to lose their pets. That's the more sanitized version of what opinions are like.

Democracy's DNA is disagreement, individuals --- not the state--- on spreading their views.

And so Utopia, "nowhere" in latin, is the opposite of this disagreement, a conformity of happiness shared by all. Come join the Stepford Wives Theory of Governance.

March 18th, 2008, 01:09 PM

Not all are interested and if they are not, then they can choose to opt out of voting in these matters (And opt back in if they wish to later.... that is their right as a citizen as I see it) But if they do not vote on a paticular matter/subject, then of course like todays mentality.... you can't have a paticular position to bitch and argue if things change in the manner in which you do not like, if you did not vote in the first place.

Does a doctor need to be a fireman? If he chooses to, sure. But when it comes to politics and running the country, personally I don't think us making the decisions would do any worse then those already in the government doing the same thing. Do you think most of the politicians in the government are experts on all the things they vote on? Nope.... that's why there's the Enviro Minister, Defence Minister, Forign affairs, etc. and not all of them get to make all the major decisions. But once again, this is reliant on that person the Prime Minister threw in there as being the best for the job..... is this a flawless proceedure? Nope.

And yet, we have been seeing this "Representative Democracy" go down the tubes for decades now, it's become more and more corrupt, corps are throwing in more money on these politicians to the point where "Representative" has changed to the elite, not the country in general. The last decade alone should be a prime example where even though the collective of a country believes and wants one thing, those elected to do so.... do not, and they go by their own principles and biases, depending on who can bribe them the most.

I am aware of Mob Rule, esspecially in what occured during Hitler's uprising with each party having their own goon squads to threaten and beat people/other politicians into voting for their party, leaving the election or else. Obviously a Constitution of some kind would still be required on top of this new process (This is just a starting grounds for now) Protection would be required for people to make sound decisions. Explinations of new laws, what they can and can not do in plain english would be required for each. If it can not be resolved easily, then the currently existing laws would remain in place until they can be resolved.

Not only do I disagree and I, nor anybody else in my life request those things (granted there are many who do) one also has to look into why the above does remain true for most..... and when you search hard for it.

• You wife wants access to you all the time either because she has trust issues (which can go into many reasons alone), or you're a pushover and allow someone like that in your life to begin with, or she has insecurity issues.

• I don't own a cell phone for many reasons, a couple of which are #1 - If I am not home, I am busy doing something and I don't need some idiot calling me all the time wherever I am. #2 - I don't need to be sitting on the bus yapping about my day for all to hear, whom all I can imagine don't want to know in the first place, because I sure don't myself.

• Bounce back to the wife wanting to know where you are all the time..... divorce the untrusting bitch.... Problem solved. I don't understand how people can put up with that crap in the first place.

• A GPS? Useless piece of equipment unless you are law enforcement trying to track a criminal. If you can read a map and you know how to drive, then you do not need a GPS and some little voice telling you when to turn left or right..... I took a drivers course for a reason, and that's to know how to drive, not to be dictated how to drive by a machine.

• My boss does not ask for me to have a company cell phone, nor a GPS, nor do I require to work on crap at home from work. If I was asked, I would refuse. My work is my work and when my time is up for the day, my work stays at work. I have more important things to do in my life then to spend it all worrying about a job all day and night. I used to do that, get stressed out, lose sleep and a lot of other crap. I won't do that again.

• Do I want my kids to have GPS's on their ankles and cell phones so I can reach them at anytime? I didn't need them growing up, our kids don't need them now. I will have enough trust in my kids to not require to have them on digital leashes 24/7.

Does any of the above actually relate to how a government works or should? Not that I can see. If any of those issues are an everyday problem of your life, then that is not to blame the government or society, but your own inaction and allowing it to get to this point. People need to start to accept responsibility in their own actions and lives.... and my intention above is to impliment more responsibility in not just our lives, but our country's direction as a whole.

Too many people think we are morons, that we can only believe in what our government's tell us, that we are incapable of making sound decisions for our lives or our country and that we should just suck it up and allow these people currently in power to keep making decisions for us. They've already proven their ineptness and failure in doing this effectively and have not only lost trust in the majority of the populations, but don't seem to even accept their own failures, blame them on someone else, and continue doing the same things as before, while nothing changes and everything continues to get worse.

I say nutz to that, nutz to these idiots who keep treating us like morons, and I say we can do better. But that's just me.

Well as Mr. Bush has proven... the "Leadership" method sucks, is flawed, and has proven it's failures. Harper for Canada has been sorta been questionable back and forth on his intentions. Regardless of who is the leader and who is making the decisions, in representational democracy, there is as much distain and mistrust in the leadership skills as there seems to be in your ability to trust the decisions of the country's collective.

History has plenty of use to me.... History is what made me come up with the above to begin with. Not only that, but we all know History is written by the victors, so how accurate can certain things be that we all read and believe?

We would begin the process all over again, yes indeed, but would not be the same process, and as we all know, History will repeat itself until we learn from our past mistakes. Why should we continue along for centuries further on a flawed and corrupt mistake rather then see something that has better potiential, reduces many of today's issues and concerns and see where that goes?

Why should we just "Stay the Course" of this form of government when most already realize it's failures, flaws, corrupt ways? Trying is always better then nothing.

True, and yet everyone's opinions are still equally valued, considdering they are just opinions. We would be Borgs if we all never argued, never debated, never disagreed. Our disagreements are what evolves us and helps us think. I would rather an accurate sum of what the collective of a country wants, then to have a dictator or one person who makes the final decisions for all. Apparently some things can not be just easily decided on a Yes/No basis, but sometimes may require a third or forth option for decision.

And that is what we humans do.... we express concerns, pros and cons, everyone should have an equal platform for their side of an argument. The end result is to either educate or to persuade for final decision making on what the debate is about. That is how decisions are made. But allowing a select few in power to make the decisions for millions+ or even one final dictator to determine these things is far from looking out for the overall best interests of the country..... it's what a very tiny fraction of the country wants or sees (Representation)

When you have one or two people making the decisions for a country, eventually the connection is lost, the leaders make stupid decisions the rest do not like or want, and then you still have disagreements or even worse... rioting and violent action of protest. Humans are always going to disagree, thinking any other way just isn't wise, but allowing for a proper method of expression that everybody has an equal right to can at least reduce the chances of this occuring without the government needing to step in and oppress. If people believe in the system and they feel it works equally for them as it does for anybody else, then trust is solidified in the system, people learn to debate and argue a bit more civilized and an end result can be reached eventually.

What I have presented above is not anything in which I would call a Utopia. If it sounds like one, then so be it, but I do not claim it to be. No matter what we do in the world/future, there will always be challenges we will face not just individually, but collectively. This form of government I know will not solve all our problems in todays way of life.... but if it will solve many of them, or at least most of the more important ones which affect our lives, then wouldn't it be a wise idea to look into it and see the benifits that may occur, rather then sticking with the same old system that shows very little progress or results, many important aspects are cut, no longer funded, keep getting worse, or just no longer exist period anymore?

The #1 problem with todays government is money/currency and the current government's infant dependancy on capitalism. Freedom & Liberty up for grabs for the Dollar. It has rotten our image of what Democracy is and what it could be. The above removes that equation. A constitution is still required above this, but for starters......

March 19th, 2008, 09:54 AM

Praxius, you might be the ultimate sophist on board here. It appears you agree and then you double talk yourself out of understanding. This allows you to return to your original point. This allows you to go right back to where you started from.

March 19th, 2008, 11:20 AM

What exactly is your point, speaking of which?

You posted things you wanted me to considder.... I considdered them as they related to the original topic in question and responded accordingly to the point in which I figured you were trying to get at and what makes sense to me. You claimed a few things on potiential intentions, I countered with what my intentions are and how I see things as they should be in regards to this discussion.

If this seems to allow me to go right back to where I started, that is because I am attempting to stick to the topic.

When I say I understand, it is in reference to me understanding what you are saying and why you said it. I then counter with what I was originally saying and why I said it, at the same time as incorporating what you submitted in your post and relating it for better understanding on overall intentions and direction.

If that's too confusing for you, I don't know what to tell you.

For example:

You went on about explaining "Division of Labour" and how someone who does one thing, would not be wise to be playing around in something else they are not expert in.... or don't have interest in.

I accepted what you were trying to say, admitted there was a level of truth to it, but also brought out another concept bouncing around in my head and claimed that I do not see a problem with a doctor being a fireman or anything else for that matter. If someone wants to do more then one thing in a career, then goto town. With that logic, if there was a simple and small fire starting out on a home, and the doctor knows how to simply put it out before it gets worse, should he just shrug his shoulders and say "Meh.... not my job" and saunter away to allow the professionals take care of it whom could take a while to get there?

Just because I understand and accept what you say, doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

Added:

and another reason why what I maybe saying here after the post, compared to what was mentioned in the first post, might seem contradicting, that is because I already stated this was a "Work in Progress" and that all opinions and ideas are welcome. When someone, such as yourself brings up one or two good points (Which you did) then I will put it into factor and chances are, yes things mentioned before will probably change.... or not.

That's the fun thing about brain storming.

If I didn't answer your comments or questions in a manner in which satisfies you, then perhaps you should word yourself better next time..... I dunno what to tell you.

March 19th, 2008, 11:22 AM

Jim

Our friend Praxius is offering a perspective and while that perspective is perhaps legitimate the under girding premise is flawed. By “voting” or if one prefers “participating in democracy”, our governments have manipulated and usurped the fundamental premise. A “system” controlled by the wealthy for the purpose of maintaining their control over the means of achieving prosperity and wealth (never mind peace and stability) has demonstrated its incapacity and failures time and time again.

Pretending that a “democracy” can survive when the chief executive of these democracies is propelled by self-interest as supported by corporate interests and ideological agendas is self-delusion.

Harper made sure he took the corporate power brokers with him on his photo-op to Mexico…. Trade talks are held by the heads of corporate America and Canada and the people who will ultimately live with the consequences of those “agreements” are disallowed. The fantasy of “democratic elections” funded and promoted by corporations who steal millions on a daily basis from the citizens of our nations leads to invasions based on securing power and wealth for the few. The greed living at the heart and soul of corporate America (and Canada) finds support through enormous financial organizations that assure the wealthy of their prosperity while millions in Canada and the United States go hungry, lose their homes and implode under the weight of helplessness and hopelessness that offers criminality and dishonesty a place to thrive.

Until there are labour laws that reflect the interests of the many, the few will continue to placate and soothe the ruffled feathers of the victims of their greed. Until there is a system (and exercise/actualization of accountability under law that does not favour the few, “justice” remains as hollow a concept as “democracy”.

My comment was intended to suggest that the myth of “democracy” isn’t something that Praxius or the average person can change by writing eloquent premises about or challenging people to think. People have been conditioned in our societies to avoid thinking. We are conditioned to believe that we don’t have any personal responsibility for anything that happens around us or to us or to our friends and neighbors….

If some “potential” for “change” is to occur, it has to begin with examining and re-inventing the social structures that define us as a society and as a people. When our politicians and our federal police are permitted to lie to us about what has happened….from Mayerthorpe to Air India…from “AdScam to Cadman….from monumental mismanagement and waste that maintains the status quo…we can’t reasonably expect change of any kind.

A legal “system” designed to favour deception and lies, the exercise of misdirection and malfeasance that passes for government in Canada, an autocracy that purposefully builds barriers to wealth and prosperity for the majority while the few loot and pillage the heart and soul of a nation won’t be saved or rescued by oratory.

March 19th, 2008, 01:29 PM



All of the above I agree to, and most of what was explained above is what drove me to write up the concept above. I imagine there are flaws here and there in the system, which is why I'm sharing it for collaboration to resolve these flaws.

The last line there caught my eye as the key reason why I decided to take the approach above as I did. We need laws and a system to make these companies and politicians accountable for their actions as equally as anyone else would be, then this so-called democracy in which we live will destroy itself.

But how can we the common citizen have faith/trust in those already in power that we suspect as corrupt and do not have our best interests in heart? How can we determine that they will correct their ways, or will just just say they did, give us some plans and laws that appear to fix the problem, but leave countless loopholes for them to play with?

To me personally it all boils back to capitalism/currency/money/greed. If you remove these factors out of the equation (Although plenty who have an abundance of this will be PO'd) then you remove the cavity in our society that has continually rotted our lives away year by year.

People will usually say "Well our country and my life isn't all that bad when you compare it to what you hear in the news out in some other place in the world. I still have food in my house, my family is going to school, I have a job that pays me to cover it all....."

^ But think about it.... is it a great and respectable country? Are those in power who represent you to the rest of the world doing what you think should be done or are they making you and the rest of your country look like crooks? You have food in your home, but so do many other people around the world... is it healthy for you? Has the government made sure what you are eating is safe, or did they skim some money off the process and outsourced those products from another country and relies on their monitoring? You're family is going to school, but what is the quality of that education? Do the children enjoy going to that school? Are the teachers actually there to make sure they stay in school and help them out when there are problems, or do they just wait until they fail enough to force them to drop out so the school's average marks are higher and thus get more funding for the following year? You have a job that pays for it all, but what really can you do in your life out of the norm that you can afford to do? Can you take your family on trips or see another country, or are you just making ends meet?

I could go on about post secondary education, medical expenses and the sort, but I think I made my generic point.

Quote:

My comment was intended to suggest that the myth of “democracy” isn’t something that Praxius or the average person can change by writing eloquent premises about or challenging people to think. People have been conditioned in our societies to avoid thinking. We are conditioned to believe that we don’t have any personal responsibility for anything that happens around us or to us or to our friends and neighbors….

As you may have noticed by various posts by me in other threads, I clearly do not believe the above. I continually express our responsibility for our own actions, that we have a role to play in the world no matter how small, and that one person can and will make dramatic change if one is so inclinde to do so.

I use the term "Democracy" because most can relate to it, and the system above perhaps relates closer to the Democracy concept then any other current system in place. The above system can be called chicken soup for all I care at this point. It is the process that I wish to focus on.

I agree that most of society maybe beaten down and have accepted their ways of life which is dictated by those we think we elect into power. But it wasn't too long ago (the 60's) where the government almost lost their control on making the people think what they want them to think. The only problem was that the hippies, although they had a great concept of life.... they lacked the ability for any solid action to carry it through and to defend it.

They just got stoned and had sex out in the woods, hoping that others would just simply catch on. Now here we are with pretty much every drug under the sun deemed illegal and an evil plague on society, except those pumped into us by the Px Corps.

The world, not just the US in the 60's were polarized and the cultural revolution took place, but the government(s) remained and things of course went back to the way they were before. It was just a few decades ago we had all the right pieces of the puzzle, we just never put it together in time. I think our societies are coming to a breaking point. People are having enough and enough the more time goes by. I know of many who are pissed at how the world and our governments are running, but will not speak out like we used to do decades ago, out of fear.