Democracy? How to make more effective decisions

2011-05-06

We always hear people asking for more Democracy. But what does that mean? Majority votes on subjects people only somewhat understand? What about the potential for influencing decisions when people are not informed on the subject they are voting? And what if 70% of the people vote to decide to kill the other 30%, it is technically "Democratic" but few would say it is moral or good.

In my opinion, "Democracy" in terms of voting is generally meaningless if you are not an authority on the subject. If you can't talk sensibly about something, would you trust yourself to decide something about it? Would you trust your friends to get together and "vote" on what kind of medical treatment you should have? Or would you rather go to an expert and get a diagnosis?

A more sensible approach, would be have people who are an authority on a subject to make their own decisions, however the key is that we should allow 100% open participation to anyone who wishes to become involved with any area or field of decision making taking place. Meaning that if you want to help decide where that bridge should be built, become a part of the bridge-crew's steering group. If you want to decide if we should be making nuclear power or green energy, join the energy comission and help make that decision. Under the precept of "open participation" no one can refuse you when you request to join a subject, instead you are asked to get up to speed on all of the various implications of each direction and decision.

For such a principle to work, information needs to be transparent and nothing would help this process more than the adoption of a universal freedom of information act. Hereby prohibiting the secret storing of any information for any purpose, thus ending intellectual materialism and all of its consequences.

Allowing open participation means anyone can join any activity, but there is also an impetuous for that person to become (self) educated in the area involved. Being involved in an actual project/subject means learning all about its affects, benefits, consequences and so forth.

Today we think "democracy" is getting a short paragraph about some new law, followed by a large amount of partisan ads, pamphlets, talking heads and advertisement. How can anyone really know what they should be voting for? or what consequences any of their "decisions" really mean?

What kind of world would it be like if instead of voting for a person, who then goes about and does whatever they want until 4 or so years are past and we get to "vote" someone else in. Where is the influence on actual decisions here? When we go to war, someone else decides. When there is an environmental disaster the people are not consulted.

Democracy is great when you compare it to what you had before: Kings and Emperors: ruling over the people for an entire lifetime. Now we still have rulers, we just submit to them in shorter terms, and supposedly they win or fail based on their popularity. But having a short-term ruler over me is not really much different to having one that lasts a long time, I am still powerless to affect change, and I still have nearly no voice in how and where my money and time can be spent. It is ridiculous that one "must" pay taxes or go to jail. If our society was really built from "people power" it would be optional and "recommended" for people to contribute and pool resources together. But it should be an amendment right to be able top chose, at a minimum, where your taxes go, let alone how much taxes you are paying.

You don't need to worry about people not pooling resources, when the world falls apart, people will realize they need to pool resources together, you don't need to "force" them to do so. Participation is a choice, not a requirement. That should be a guiding definition when we say the word "FREE".

Imagine what the world would be like, if instead the "people" were the ones who were free to get engaged in all decisions taking place at all times. The limit would simply be how many things you can possibly get involved into at the same time; so people would select the things that were important to them, and which have meaning, tangible projects and objectives that would benefit themselves and those in their own affected communities.

No more "voting" for people, let's vote on "ideas". And let our ballot paper instead be our time and energy invested.