Gomery and Direct Democracy

Gomery and Direct Democracy
The Scandals go on and on


You would think that with all the scandals that our political parties have been involved in, in the past 25 years, the Canadian electorate would be ready for a structural change. You would think that the public would not accept to vote for yet another change of "party" as a solution to the political accountability problem. Do we not remember the Airbus scandal and the so-called Free Trade Agreement (FTA), and then The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)? Do we not remember Mulrooney (the Airbus Affair)? And then Chretien(The Hotel Grand-mere)? And now Martin and then Harper? What about the David Emerson affair? Does anyone really think things will change, and that the scams will stop with a change of party?

The system is set up as a pyramid. The ones who reach the top of the pyramid (our so-called servants) become compromised very quickly, to their funders and benefactors. Where their source of input was the "constituents", it is now the "party machine". Whenever there is a pool of money or power, the energy (or the individual) at the top of the pyramid, although being a basically good person, expresses that built-in corruption.

Do we have to keep stating the same philosophy ad infinitum without ever learning anything: Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. Power is vectored (directed) energy. Power, as directed energy, works well at the implementation stage, but at the decision-making stage, where intuition, experimentation, and tangential thinking are needed so as to come up with new solutions to the current problems of "structural corruption", the pyramid paradigm, that works well in the military and in capitalism, with it's "Roberts Rules of Order" does not work well. To make good decision, we have to be emotionally detached. We, the masses, not being part of the pyramidical power structure, are detached. We only become attached (ticked off) when our servants keep making the same gaffs over and over again, stealing our money, without ever offering any solutions in return. It's time for a structural change.

The Captain of the ship in a democracy is "We the People". We, the masses, not occupying the top of the pyramid, and being the majority, have numbers on our side. Rather that voting in a pyramid scheme, we can use a different paradigm like "the circle". We can empower every point in the "circle of the masses" through direct democracy, vote on issues, and let the wisdom of the many (numbers theory) rather that the greed of the few guide us.

Is it not time for the Canadian electorate to bite the bullet and vote for a structural change in the electoral process itself. Is it not time to vote on issues in a "direct democracy"? True, our servants will scream "bloody murder" and will not agree, but in a democracy, are "we" not the "master of the house" and "they", the servants "They" do not have any power, unless "we" give it to them? We do not have to ask, we just need to do it. For the past 25 years, I have voted "none of the above" (NOTA) and when any politician asks for my vote, I tell them so, and I demand that they count me as participating in the process. They have not yet, counting me instead as a "spoiled" ballots, but they will soon. Mine is not a "spoiled" ballot. Mine is a demand for a structural change. As soon as "we", because I am not alone, have the numbers, things will change. Then, "we" will vote on issues, including budgets, and remove "frauds and scammers", very quickly. Direct democracy for large countries was not possible until now. We now have the technology, we can do it.

Some will call direct democracy the "tyranny of the majority", and say it will never work, but I say it’s better than the "tyranny of the minority" we have now, and it already works in twelve states in the United States of America and Switzerland. It’s called "true", or "direct" democracy. Democracy, like everything else, is a living entity and has to evolve or it becomes corrupt. Representative democracy, our current system, has run its course and like a good soldier who has done a great job, let’s give it a medal and put it in the history books where it belongs. It’s time for "direct Democracy".

Our current representative democracy is a uni-dimensional or linear system with the right wing (.01% of the population) and the left wing (.01% of the population) at either end of the line. The "masses", the true "power" in a democracy, are at the centre, controlling 99.98% of the true power but feels powerless. This uni-dimensional system is being used in a society that has moved technologically to four spatial dimensions (i.e. computers, virtual reality, etc.) and theoretically to 11 and 26 dimensions (String theory and M theory of Physics). Representative democracy as we have it in most of the countries on the planet is a remnant of a system from the "horse and buggy" days, when the distances were so great that a representative had to take the votes of the many to a central location. We now have computers and the Internet, we can vote on-line and quickly. Quantum encryption is just around the corner. NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) is already preparing the protocols. There already has been one on-line election in Switzerland. The election was at the municipal level, to decide on a "money" issue of 5 million dollars. 60% voted on-line and 40% voted the "old way". Switzerland has led the way, let us not be the last to adapt.

It’s time for our decision-making process to speed up and catch up. We have to open up "Nota" (none of the above) and the "Abstain" option to make the system a three dimensional system, at least. Then we will be in a "consensus" mode. NOTA really means, "I care about the process and want to be counted, but the options presented are not sufficient, or rephrase the question". Abstain really means, "I care about the process, and want to be counted, but I will go along with the majority". An example would be: "I will vote for recycling. How we get recycling off the ground, I will leave to the experts or to the majority. I will abstain on the "How to get to Recycling" question.

Also, on questions of morality, are we not smart (or moral) enough to vote on issues like abortion, capital punishment, etc. If we are not, are our representatives moral enough to vote on our behalf. Can we not take control of our own house and put it in order.

Some states in the United States of America already have a "direct democracy" and vote on "initiatives" which are initiated and phrased by the petitioner’s, not only "referenda" where the bureaucrats or the governments phrase the question. These referenda are really only polls and are not binding by law, on our elected servants. The examples of government-initiated referenda we have seen recently in British Columbia were phrased so badly that it "repusled" (turned-off) the electorate from participating. Two such examples are the Victoria, solid waste treatment referendum and the provincial government’s Aboriginal land claim referendum. These were phrased so badly that one wonders if they were not an intentional act of sabotage by the bureaucrats and the elected representatives who really do not want "direct Democracy" to work because it would mean a loss of power for them. It would be "new" and "new" is always complicated.

If we are to look at direct democracy seriously, we have to establish some rules within which this not-so-new electoral system can function. For instance we cannot allow our tax dollars to be used to influence our vote one way or the other. Also, our servants, the bureaucrats and the elected representative, along with "interested" parties, can have input by giving the pros and cons of the issue. The electorate, as the master of the house, can then decide after due deliberation.

There is nothing that says that a vote on a specific issue can’t be "dynamic". Voting could start on one day and continue for a month or even longer, giving the electorate time to research the issue, communicate with one another or with experts and have the ability to change their vote until the agreed deadline. The election and the "polls" would then act in tandem. We have the technology, we can do it.

Another obvious rule would be: "Yes or No" questions are not permitted on an omnibus bill (a bill with many items, as in the Aboriginal Land Claim agreement". When a bill such as the Aboriginal Land Claim agreements comes to a vote, as in British Columbia, we, the masters of the house, must be able to vote on specific items and not just on the "whole package". On most items in an omnibus bill, most of the electorate would abstain but a percentage would participate and the issue would certainly be decided quicker than with the system we now have in place.

There are already "voting" software programs being tested around the world. Some companies such as Global Election Systems, traded on the NY Stock Exchange, have already done test runs among the American student population in the New York area.

It might mean thinking of our society in futuristic terms and seeing the structure of our society as a "technocracy". In a "star trek" future, science and technology becomes the driving force and economists, or the cost of things, becomes subservient to the imperatives of survival and the technological needs of the larger society. It’s time to jump into the future and not look back.Don’t leave me out there by myself. As masters of the house, we do not have to ask permission. Just vote NOTA and demand to be counted. It’s not as fast as a revolution but also not as violent and truly Canadian. It’s a slow process like evolution but we only need a few more votes to reach critical mass for the "quantum leap" or the "100th monkey". Is that YOU?

To quote Jean-Luc Picard: "Make it so".

4d-Don

ONE (God) and Direct Democracy

ONE (God) AND DIRECT DEMOCRACY
A THEOLOGICAL FANTASY INTO REALITY

Never upon a Time, there was NOTHING. Since NOTHING existed, nothing could be said about IT or about anything else because NOTHING else existed. There was no Motion measured in time units, no Matter measured in distance units, no Energy measured in intensity units, no Vacuum, measured in abstract or virtual minus intensity units. NOTHING. ZERO. ZILCH. Not this, not that.

Once upon a Time, there is ONE. And ONE is ALL there is. And NOTHING does not exist. ONE knows everything that IS. IT knows about ITSELF, ONE, ALL or SOMETHING. ONE is everywhere there IS. IT is ALL Motion, measured in time unit. IT is ALL Matter measured in distance units. IT is ALL Energy measured in intensity units. IT is ALL Vacuum measured in abstract or virtual minus intensity units. NOTHING does not exist. Well, MAYBE and/or MAYBE NOT, NOTHING existed before ONE. Then ONE knows about NOTHING that IS NOT. And ONE called MAYBE and/or MAYBE NOT the MIND.

Twice upon a Time, there was and still is the MIND. There is ONE, and MIND. Before ONE and MIND, there is or was NOTHING. MIND measured and still measures the Motion between ONE and NOTHING in time, distance and energy units. MIND used and still uses time units to measure the Motion between the duality of the TWO, ONE and NOTHING. MIND used and still uses distance units to measure between the Matter in ONE. MIND used and still uses intensity units to measure between the Energy in ONE. MIND used and still uses abstract or virtual minus intensity units to measure between the Vacuum in ONE.

Never upon a Time, there was NOTHING(zero), once upon a Time there was ONE (the singularity) and twice upon a Time there was ONE and MIND(duality). Then MIND called itself the MIND. The MIND thought and still thinks it created itself and that it was and still is the Cause of everything.

Well, you get the picture and you can see where this theological fantasy is going. From the zero point (Buddhism, not this/not that), to one point, (Singularity, monotheism, God, ONE), represented by the one point of zero dimension. From one to two (dualism, Creator/creation or the Mind, represented by the line between the two points, called one dimension). From two to three (Triangle of the Trinity, Creator (God the Father), Creation (God the Son or Jesus) and the Mind is now the Interaction between the Two, or the Holy Ghost of 2nd century Christianity (notice no female, nor the marginalized, so very "elitist" and not "universal"), represented by the three points or the plane or two dimensions). From three to four (Volume, 3-d, represented by the tetrahedron, the pyramid of representative democracy, close to our experienced reality as it includes the masses (universality), excludes the paranormal, or 4-d of metaphysical events, practices and mythical beings such as angels, spirits, and ghosts, fairies, elves etc.....spirituality, psychic phenomenon, new physics in n… dimensions, super-luminar communication etc….)

In our current pyramid of “representative democracy”, we are a 3-d (or 4-d?) society using a uni-dimensional decision-making, or voting tool of yes/no, good/bad, black/white etc leading to a them/us, winner take all, divided society. We are trying to deal with the complex, multi-dimensional problems of a multi-racial, multi-ethnic, multi-religious planet with the un-evolved remnants of a system designed hundreds of years ago for an elite, not for the masses.

What is happening at the national and state level will soon be happening at the global level. Soon we will have to make decisions in global elections. We will be voting on global issues that cannot be decided by a simple uni-dimensional “yes or no” vote. The issues are too complex. To remain with the same “representative democracy” is to spread our political elitism and corruption to other developing states. God help us if we encounter other life-forms in the universe with a divided population as we now have. We will be seen as a “virus” to be eradicated.

The “MAYBE/MAYBE NOT”, of the evolved thinking MIND (in the fantasy above), which is really reflected in “none of the above” (NOTA) or “rephrase the question” is not represented on our ballots and we can readily understand why in the historical context of representative democracy. It took too much time. “Abstain” is also not on our ballot although it is used extensively in business and in the political process itself. It is only the masses, the "people" who do not have that power to vote “none of the above” or “abstain” and/or to amend the choice put forward on the ballot.

The communication revolution has (or soon will) changed all that. Now, it is representative democracy that is too slow and too corruptible. One person cannot represent the many. The servants we elect really represent the “pressure groups”, the "party". Exerting pressure takes a lot of money and time, empowers the elite, and makes for bad and corrupt decisions because the decisions are eventually influenced and manipulated by the small groups with the higher paid or more ruthless lobbyists. Nature and/or the majority’s concerns are not adequately represented and never will be in a representative democracy. A truly democratic ballot on an issue would have four choices: YES, NO, NOTA and ABSTAIN. Or weighted votes, could really be a rating system of one to five (as an example) for some issues.

The underlying paradigm of our "Power politics" system is a pyramid, while the Energy paradigm is a sphere or a spiral. One (the pyramid) centralizes energy or power in three dimensions at the vertices (the point) and that is where the corruption takes place. The point-person, who is really the servant, begins to think he/she is the leader. When the energy does not flow, it becomes hard, thick-skinned or dogmatic and corrupt. The examples of stagnant water or “pools of money” attracting diseases and corruption are valid. The sphere or spiral on the other hand distributes the energy in three dimensions to the entire surface evenly. The healthy way of dealing with energy as with power or money is to spread it around and let it flow naturally or it becomes corrupt, regressive, repressive and abusive. We cannot stop the flow of energy or power and then cure or fix it. It’s like caging the tiger and studying it. It will not give a correct or natural representation of the tiger as it is in the wild. Caging and studying the tiger will give a false or corrupt image of the tiger’s reality. The caged tiger will become ill as our political system has. The tiger of democracy, as our political or decision-making power, must be shared with the broader masses through voting on issues in a “direct democracy”. The tiger of democracy is a living entity and must evolve to survive.

Voting on issues was not practical before the communication revolution, and the Age of Information, and it still is not possible in a “representative democracy”. What we get in a representative democracy are polls with legally “non binding” referenda. But it is possible in a “consensus”, "initiative" or a “direct democracy”. We needed the technology to make it possible, and now we have it. The communication revolution is upon us, and the political revolution is beginning. We can do it. As Captain Jean Luc Picard on Star Trek says, “ Make is so”.

4d-Don