Occupii
WARNING: May contain opinions
"The Solution" explained for the common man.
1) You must vote if you are unhappy with the system, not voting is seen as a sign of your contentment with the current system.
2) The politicians are the weak link, by empowering them, to talk for us, we leave them open to corruption. The corruptor, knows to steal the voice of a community, he only needs to bribe that 1 voice.
3) Voting for a person, who wants you to give your voice to him and his party, is what we are doing wrong.
4) To end this power game which takes our kids to war, we should vote for a person who stands against the parties in a fair election, one whose only promise will be to return the power of the voice to the people, by setting up electronic voting by text, so we can ALL vote on the issues that affect our lives, instead of some suit with some promises and lies.
5) Once the Orator has shifted the power back to the people, their job would be to maintain the integrity of your vote and to vote in Parliament, the way you in the community tell him to, with your vote on the issue. Your speaker would then vote acording to the majority voice in the community.
6) Your services and administration would remain intact, for the people are the social services.
7) We each have our individual power of voice, by voting for the parties, you are voting for your own voice to be silenced. We should guard it jealously with our lives, our children's future depends upon it.
8) Your Orator as well as having no parliamentary priviledge, will be bound by the Common Law of all Freemen, which is ... NO HARM, NO Loss & NO LIE. Simple and straight forward. No mumbo-jumbo to confuse us with. Every proposal they put to the people, must also abide by Common Law, to stop people from agitating the people to violent thought or action. This will keep our council thinking good thoughts, which will restore the honour the politician sold so cheaply
The reason that we the people will win, is because the polititian will try to convince you that they know better, that you cannot be trusted with deciding matters and that by treating you as a child, who they can silence at will, which hey will say,is better for you, than being given the gift of responsability and authority over your own future. This I know none of us will ever stand for. This is our future really, not war and nuclear devastation.
Peace and Love
The Hippie.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Lewinski on -
I like the idea of changing how we do Democracy to get better representation and the ability to vote on issues instead of people.
Voting by text has security issues however, and I'm not yet satisfied it can be done right. Caller ID is unreliable and there's little to keep someone from voting for other people. In general, electronic voting is tricky. The best ideas involve issuing hardware crypto tokens - smart cards - with proof of identity. There's still potential for the manipulation of the totals after the fact, so the whole process of vetting and tallying of votes needs to be open to outside observers.
I also have concerns about how people who can't afford phones or computers will still have their say.
-
Permalink Reply by Stu Phillips on -
In the full version these elements are dealt with. The individuals voice would still be minute, not worth corupting, for you would need a significant number of peoples individual voices to affect change, that it would stand out like a sore thumb.
Secondly, by entering your NI number and the issue number in a free text, that gives us a phone regto a person, a unique reference number and a GPS co-ordinate to track where the vote was made.
The votes are copied and sent for verification at the UN. Every person should be able to log on and find theior own page and re-assure themselves, that their voice has been recognised and registered properly.
This should cover security don't you think ?
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Lewinski on
-
It sounds interesting. How can I read the full version?
--
Copied from chat for posterity:
I just ran across this, an open source political framework for citizen voters who are peer-graded by level of expertise on a subject, before they vote. I find that idea very interesting and think that it bears consideration.
Your article also brought to mind www.thirty-thousand.org which goes the other direction, of increasing representative democracy. I think their basic theory could be summed up as "dilution is the solution to pollution" of the democratic process by corporate money.
-
Permalink Reply by Stu Phillips on
-
Personally I wish that our children could be taught civic responsability from a young age. Then, their councils will shine the full version is the other discussion on my page, called "The Solution
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Lewinski on
-
Thanks, I'll read up on the full version.
While pondering the e-voting this morning, I thought to myself "we need a peer-to-peer network, like bitcoin, to verify votes". I just ran across this news story reporting on that very topic.
-
Permalink Reply by Stu Phillips on
-
very interesting, thata the type of tech, I was imagining but never realised existed. Thanks for the heads up
Mike Lewinski said:Thanks, I'll read up on the full version.
While pondering the e-voting this morning, I thought to myself "we need a peer-to-peer network, like bitcoin, to verify votes". I just ran across this news story reporting on that very topic.
-
Permalink Reply by pearshapeduniverse on -
this is awesome, rule by referendum is a cool concept and i fully endorse it to be voted on at the earliest opportunity
thx hippy, love your mind
-
Permalink Reply by SneakyMannekuh on -
if you want power to the people it is not called democracy
it is called isocracy, this means people get to vote not on representatives but on the actual laws that are being passed
i do think we should make it layered and on a meritocracy base also. layers can be city/province/country/world or something the like. meritocracy means you have to know a minimum about a subject to be able to vote for it
-
Permalink Reply by ArtFrancisco on -
I think the polemic failed after 3. You won't win through electoral politics... Socialist Party of America, Communist Party of America, Green Party RIP
-
Permalink Reply by Stu Phillips on
-
As we are a movement and not a party, we encompass all parties and faiths. The reason those parties you mentioned failed, was because they sought to use the power of the office, to effect change.
What makes us different is our abhorrence of power. By only standing to give the people, their voice back. We in effect will empower them. Something every party wants to deny them. For the aim of every party is to gain power and silence the opposition.
Marcos said:I think the polemic failed after 3. You won't win through electoral politics... Socialist Party of America, Communist Party of America, Green Party RIP
-
Permalink Reply by ArtFrancisco on
-
I heard all of this rhetoric when Obama was running for office. He would empower the people, he was a maverick to the existing parties, he would create a dramatic change. You're right when you say that the aim of every party is to gain power and silence the opposition. Why? Every party works for the 1%, and it is all about widening their slice of the pie.
It is like a puppet master, and the 1% is the puppet master. The puppets are the politicians, and their puppets are the progressive liberals (social democrats). The strings are the money. All you are saying is that the old puppets are dusty... so new puppets will change things, but the new puppets will still be controlled by the puppet master because the puppet show is run by the 1%.
If you are really interested in any serious party, it is not an electoral party, but a revolutionary party. When I use the word party I am using a word that describes a massive organization. How this party would look like would likely be a network as opposed to democratic centralism (like previous revolutionary parties). If it is an open and transparent network we can avoid corruption and the rise of a new bourgeoisie.
What makes us different is our abhorrence of power. By only standing to give the people, their voice back. We in effect will empower them. Something every party wants to deny them. For the aim of every party is to gain power and silence the opposition.
-
Permalink Reply by Stu Phillips on
-
Firstly, I am against any type of party, they only serve to devide the people which is the old adversarial way of conducting business.
As we are a movement, not a party, we encompass all groups and parties. It is important that this is not changed.
By standing as a representative, a member of the movement, becomes the facilitator of their peoples voice. By disolving the power inherent in the office, back to the people, to decide on the issues that affect them. There is no way for the 1% to use their influence. In fact they would probably be very worried about what the people decide to do about them.
If you think,I want to raise another egomaniac, just to replace the present one, you could not be more wrong.
Turning the power structure on it's head is what I am focussed on. It can only be accomplished by empowering the individual.
Marcos said:I heard all of this rhetoric when Obama was running for office. He would empower the people, he was a maverick to the existing parties, he would create a dramatic change. You're right when you say that the aim of every party is to gain power and silence the opposition. Why? Every party works for the 1%, and it is all about widening their slice of the pie.
It is like a puppet master, and the 1% is the puppet master. The puppets are the politicians, and their puppets are the progressive liberals (social democrats). The strings are the money. All you are saying is that the old puppets are dusty... so new puppets will change things, but the new puppets will still be controlled by the puppet master because the puppet show is run by the 1%.
If you are really interested in any serious party, it is not an electoral party, but a revolutionary party. When I use the word party I am using a word that describes a massive organization. How this party would look like would likely be a network as opposed to democratic centralism (like previous revolutionary parties). If it is an open and transparent network we can avoid corruption and the rise of a new bourgeoisie.
What makes us different is our abhorrence of power. By only standing to give the people, their voice back. We in effect will empower them. Something every party wants to deny them. For the aim of every party is to gain power and silence the opposition.
Photos
Events
-
Make More of Mumble Meeting MMOMM (Tuesday)
May 28, 2013 from 7pm to 8pm – Mumble Server
0 Comments 10 Likes
Videos
Music
Blog Posts
Nature Isn't Silly
Posted by Barb Dwyer on May 16, 2013 at 2:30 3 Comments 0 Likes
Where to begin…first - I apologize for this being so LONG everyone knows I hate wordy drawn out blogs so ... karma? Who knows.
There’s a small retaining pond behind the college apartments. I go back there several times a day; it’s a good area that forces me to have a bit of a walk. …
Continue
15th Official Toronto Marijuana March
Posted by TerryX on May 11, 2013 at 14:26 0 Comments 0 Likes
The Importance Of Reverse Phone Lookup.
Posted by Valentin Stokes on May 3, 2013 at 13:27 0 Comments 0 Likes
The first three digits of the phone number would also help them locate the owner of the phone number. The thing is that if they had just run a phone number lookup, they could have found each other! Before you get any ideas, let me tell you that these sites are perfectly legal and also offer their services free of cost. This happens to many different people all over the world and many of them don't know how they can identify these pranksters. It's extremely… Continue
We are supposed to be in this together!
Posted by Nette Mom on April 26, 2013 at 20:55 0 Comments 0 Likes
I was just endiing a campaign in Michigan against our Governor, and wondered what more was out there, what more can I do to help make my country the place I used to love, when I stumbled across a thing called Livestream, where people with the same purpose (supposedly) or like mindness could come together, chat, discuss, plan, and act and I was to say the least, excited. I started chatting and made so many friends and it was then I realized, that I had been wrapped up in my own small…
ContinueMembers
Groups
© 2013 Created by nul.
