Not my original idea:
1. We all have either a device attached to the tele or we use the Black Berry or we use our mobile and our National Insurance number gives us ID which enables us to vote at any time on a number of legislative proposals.
2. All the pollies have been sacked, political parties disbanded and the civil service trimmed down to its new executive function of feeding proposals in and administering them as and when they arise.
3. Proposals are mooted by any member of the public [maybe one per month] and go onto a database. Then, a sort of mailticker thing operates where they are added to the list as they come in and people can vote on them. We can view them on the tele screen or on the phone or wherever, at any time.
4. A simple majority passes the proposal with no quorum required, following a two week deliberation period. The question of frivolous or repeated proposals would self-actuallize and only serious, documented items would get the consideration they deserve.
5. If people wanted some kind of background to vote on, there'd be a comments thread with subfolders and so on, with finally a Yea folder or Nay folder where you or I, who had been sitting on the couch discussing this issue, could switch on the mike and feed it in to the little box. Voom - it's in the folder for someone in another part of the country to listen to if they wish.
6. Once a proposal passes, the civil service implements it in the light of other similar proposals on the issue. Example - the Iraq President gets lippy; someone proposes we nuke him. It wouldn't pass but if the majority wanted, well, we'd nuke him.
7. It would have the eventual effect of raising the political consciousness of ordinary people to issues affecting their life, government wastage would be reduced to negligible proportions, the pollies couldn't ruin things, freedoms would be protected and the people who were most interested would run things but not within a formal structure like a party.
8. Another advantage would be to make government well nigh unworkable and proposals slow to implement. Good - they should be well thought out first. You might say - hey, what if the army is needed for an emergency? Well, someone would propose it and the military commanders would do the rest - it's not the job of government. It would prevent high-ups having their little spurious war.
9. All right, you say - it might be a nice idea but there's fat chance of those in power giving it up that easily. Well, that's true. For now.
1. We all have either a device attached to the tele or we use the Black Berry or we use our mobile and our National Insurance number gives us ID which enables us to vote at any time on a number of legislative proposals.
2. All the pollies have been sacked, political parties disbanded and the civil service trimmed down to its new executive function of feeding proposals in and administering them as and when they arise.
3. Proposals are mooted by any member of the public [maybe one per month] and go onto a database. Then, a sort of mailticker thing operates where they are added to the list as they come in and people can vote on them. We can view them on the tele screen or on the phone or wherever, at any time.
4. A simple majority passes the proposal with no quorum required, following a two week deliberation period. The question of frivolous or repeated proposals would self-actuallize and only serious, documented items would get the consideration they deserve.
5. If people wanted some kind of background to vote on, there'd be a comments thread with subfolders and so on, with finally a Yea folder or Nay folder where you or I, who had been sitting on the couch discussing this issue, could switch on the mike and feed it in to the little box. Voom - it's in the folder for someone in another part of the country to listen to if they wish.
6. Once a proposal passes, the civil service implements it in the light of other similar proposals on the issue. Example - the Iraq President gets lippy; someone proposes we nuke him. It wouldn't pass but if the majority wanted, well, we'd nuke him.
7. It would have the eventual effect of raising the political consciousness of ordinary people to issues affecting their life, government wastage would be reduced to negligible proportions, the pollies couldn't ruin things, freedoms would be protected and the people who were most interested would run things but not within a formal structure like a party.
8. Another advantage would be to make government well nigh unworkable and proposals slow to implement. Good - they should be well thought out first. You might say - hey, what if the army is needed for an emergency? Well, someone would propose it and the military commanders would do the rest - it's not the job of government. It would prevent high-ups having their little spurious war.
9. All right, you say - it might be a nice idea but there's fat chance of those in power giving it up that easily. Well, that's true. For now.
Want some Meat to Eat?
ReplyDeleteJim Willie again but interesting.
ReplyDeleteOk but what happens if there is a power cut !
ReplyDeleteJames, there are a large amount of commentaries appearing in that general direction, mainly the loss of US hegemony, loss of reserve currency status, jockeying for inclusion in basket, gold backed, etc. Euro is mentioned in basket discussions, but NOT £.
ReplyDeleteDenominating world commodities in currencies OTHER than the $.
Coming from EU, ECB, Broon, organisations newly created to represent SWFs, S.E.A Govt's + Russia, + Brazil (maybe).....
Upcoming major S.E.Asia purchase of Brazil Assets.
Canada $ survives, but kept low (cheap commods)
The writing is on the wall.
Meetings planned!
Basically the G7 is toast.
Decline in influence, standard of living, quality of life, quality of "freedom".
Stuff we've talked about.
Moving very rapidly.
Previous Jim Willie looking more and more credible.
It's baked in.
Eddie George and Gold
ReplyDelete"We looked into the abyss if the gold price rose further. A further rise would have taken down one or several trading houses, which might have taken down all the rest in their wake. Therefore, at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was very difficult to get the gold price under control but we have now succeeded. The U.S. Fed was very active in getting the gold price down. So was the U.K."
Eddie George, Bank of England, September 1999
Or as the great stock market bear Daniel Drew once said in another context:
He who sells what isn't his'n
Must buy it back, or go to prison.
Hope to see you and your friends at some future financial Nuremburg, Sir Alan Greenspam and Herr Doktor Bernanke.
Gosh! That sounds far too much like democracy....! Great idea, where do I buy one?
ReplyDeleteI must get you out campaigning with us next time we go ;-)
ReplyDeleteGlad someone approved. :)
ReplyDeletePower cut - we watch a movie on the crank up portable set.
ReplyDeleteIt is, if I may speak quite frankly, an appalling idea. I simply cannot understand how anyone can say he is in favour of a fair degree of personal freedom and then propose an idea that is directly contrary to it: a pure majoritarian democracy.
ReplyDeleteYou have a point, Deogolwulf - have to think this through.
ReplyDelete