Democratic vs undemocratic

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Moderator: Uccisore

Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby AutSider » Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:03 pm

Image

This is interesting. One could make the argument that even in a democracy there are still people who disagree with the politicians in power, so they must have some level of protection. But then how come that "authoritarian" leaders who supposedly oppress the general population are so well liked that they interact openly and physically with the people?

I think the answer may lie in the fact that in democracies, although technically everybody has a vote nobody's vote influences politics to a significant extent, so all other factors equal, people are just as unhappy/happy as in authoritarian societies. Seriously, what's the big difference between not being able to vote and having 0% influence and being able to vote and having 0.000001% or so influence? It's completely insignificant.

One big difference between authoritarian and democratic societies is that in authoritarian societies, since it is made clear that politicians have power and the people do not, all responsibility will be placed on politicians and if they do a bad job, woe be unto them - the people may get pissed off and riot, or even start a revolution and overthrow the authoritarian government.
But in democratic governments if politicians do bad things, they will not be held responsible because you, the average Joe, supposedly picked them, even though you practically had no influence on who gets picked. So people tend to put undue responsibility and blame on themselves which prevents them from questioning and overthrowing a corrupt political order because it gives them an illusion of choice and thus responsibility for that choice.

Voting only truly matters if it is restricted to a small portion of the population so that each individual vote has a reasonable influence on the outcome. Otherwise it's just a sham to keep people obedient and sheepish.
Image
User avatar
AutSider
Truth seeker
 
Posts: 3248
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2014 9:04 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby WendyDarling » Thu Jul 27, 2017 11:41 pm

The problem is not with the votes (as long as the election is not rigged) the problem is with the candidates.

The candidates need to be randomly picked citizens who agree or disagree to run for office and these government positions assumed by average citizens are done at the lower levels, so people get experience governing before they, the lower governors, are again randomly picked to voluntarily assume a position up the chain of command, at each level of government, learning to govern successfully, then at some point those who have governed from the bottom to the top will be randomly chosen for the highest positions. Those few chosen randomly who voluntarily succeeded from the governments ground floor up would be elected into the top governmental offices.

The big election would occur for the highest position, but all those running would have a long record of government service and hopefully would be very knowledgeable about their positions/jobs.

In my type of government, you would have to rig the random citizen generator. You could not buy a seat with money or power.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5582
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby WendyDarling » Fri Jul 28, 2017 3:04 am

JSS,
Did you understand my last post about the formulation of a new structure of government, of how government positions are filled, and how those governors move up the ladder? First, did it make sense? If not, what's unclear or imprecise?
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5582
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:02 pm

WendyDarling wrote:JSS,
Did you understand my last post about the formulation of a new structure of government, of how government positions are filled, and how those governors move up the ladder? First, did it make sense? If not, what's unclear or imprecise?

Well let me premise this by saying, if you aren't doing things in the best way, the "right way", then you are necessarily doing them the "wrong way". The intellectual challenge is to find the best way (considering the diverse circumstancing potentially involved), not merely a potentially good way. Given any one situation, there is only one best way (SAM Co-ops based upon MIJOT pursuit).

But now:
* Did I understand the post? I think so.
* Did it make sense? Well, yes and no. The reasoning was cohesive, but a bit presumptuous.
* What is unclear or imprecise? It is a bit unclear as to why a candidate would be chosen who doesn't want to be in that position (which will turn out to be the more sane people). What is imprecise is first, the presumption that choosing comes from an above social authority and second, is reflected in the consequences of choosing randomly when the population is more insane than sane (including "undereducated"). What happens in a society when the "lower" echelon governors are insane. Currently that lower level is the parents, "randomly" assigned by lower nature. What happens if they didn't want to be parents? Merely look around in order to see what happens when they are undereducated and/or insane ("not knowing right from wrong"). The randomness stems from below, not from above.

Just above the families, there are the PTAs, churches, gangs, or other social clubs and organizations, also already "randomly chosen" due to the fact that the random parents are choosing them based upon their personal insanity style.

And then above those are the more strategical manipulators, seemingly randomly chosen due to the lower level random choosing going on. The manipulators present the image of being chosen by the somewhat insane population so as to reduce rebellion, "Hey, I am only here because you elected me." Of course, such elections are almost always manipulated by one or more people strategically promoting their own favor (e.g. "He is a Zionist, so let's speak of all of the great goodness of him and silence those who would defame him").

And then above all of that are the even more strategical manipulators utilizing more hidden influences: "He who reigns in darkness, rules the world".

It is through randomness that the current situation of high manipulation, anti-randomness, has occurred. And it forms structure and the power to choose, either for good or bad, simply because it is no longer random, but strategic. When a society is random, it is insane and either gets overtaken or dies.

It seems in an effort to overcome the manipulation, you are suggesting more randomness should be instilled. Yes, that would disrupt the manipulation schemes, but then the consequences are that the stable ability to intentionally elect randomly in only that specific manner, the ability to maintain that governing scheme, is itself the potential and probable victim of random events stemming from an insane population. Social structure and authority depend upon preventing randomness in favor of educated strategic planning. Once you lose that ability to ensure a specific future, you lose the ability to choose how you get to your future governing state and what happens afterward. In short, you die out as a method.

I agree that some specific things should be more random and far, far less manipulated, but trying to dictate randomness seems even more fatal than trying to dictate order. By dictating order, at least one has a chance to do it again. The trick is to promote the exact right type of order such that the result is altruistic, not egocentric. That isn't trivial at all, but what SAM Co-ops are designed to handle.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:11 pm

I prefer tribal dictators myself introducing some dictatorial competition. Think feudalism and warlords only for the modern age instead.

Sure, there is always going to be some guy in charge but if that guy isn't me, why bother?

One guy to rule the world? :lol: World is too large for one man to manage.

Image
Last edited by Otto_West on Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:16 pm

Otto_West wrote:I prefer tribal dictators myself introducing some dictatorial competition. Think feudalism.

Sure, there is always going to be some guy in charge but if that guy isn't me, why bother?

You probably haven't read much about SAM Co-ops, but they are largely similar to tribes interlinked through specific means so as to choose when to cooperate into a greater unified force, yet void of mass deceit.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Sat Jul 29, 2017 5:17 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:I prefer tribal dictators myself introducing some dictatorial competition. Think feudalism.

Sure, there is always going to be some guy in charge but if that guy isn't me, why bother?

You probably haven't read much about SAM Co-ops, but they are largely similar to tribes interlinked through specific means so as to choose when to cooperate into a greater unified force, yet void of mass deceit.

You cannot get people to cooperate with each other on their own, never going to happen.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Sat Jul 29, 2017 7:30 pm

Otto_West wrote:
James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:I prefer tribal dictators myself introducing some dictatorial competition. Think feudalism.

Sure, there is always going to be some guy in charge but if that guy isn't me, why bother?

You probably haven't read much about SAM Co-ops, but they are largely similar to tribes interlinked through specific means so as to choose when to cooperate into a greater unified force, yet void of mass deceit.

You cannot get people to cooperate with each other on their own, never going to happen.

Nothing is ever "on their own".
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Sat Jul 29, 2017 8:05 pm

James S Saint wrote:Nothing is ever "on their own".

I'm just saying cooperation doesn't work without some form of coercion or compulsion.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Arminius » Sun Jul 30, 2017 1:42 am

James S Saint wrote:The randomness stems from below, not from above.

Just above the families, there are the PTAs, churches, gangs, or other social clubs and organizations, also already "randomly chosen" due to the fact that the random parents are choosing them based upon their personal insanity style.

And then above those are the more strategical manipulators, seemingly randomly chosen due to the lower level random choosing going on. The manipulators present the image of being chosen by the somewhat insane population so as to reduce rebellion, "Hey, I am only here because you elected me." Of course, such elections are almost always manipulated by one or more people strategically promoting their own favor (e.g. "He is a Zionist, so let's speak of all of the great goodness of him and silence those who would defame him").

And then above all of that are the even more strategical manipulators utilizing more hidden influences: "He who reigns in darkness, rules the world".

It is typical for the Occidental culture, especially in these days, that thou shalt not found out who the ruler is. Preferably, the real ruler should not be more known than a variable in a functional equation of an infinitesimal calculus. This means that you have to do a certain mathematical homework before you can find out who the real ruler is. Since: Thou shalt not found out who the ruler is! :obscene-smokingred:

James S Saint wrote:It is through randomness that the current situation of high manipulation, anti-randomness, has occurred. And it forms structure and the power to choose, either for good or bad, simply because it is no longer random, but strategic. When a society is random, it is insane and either gets overtaken or dies.

It seems in an effort to overcome the manipulation, you are suggesting more randomness should be instilled. Yes, that would disrupt the manipulation schemes, but then the consequences are that the stable ability to intentionally elect randomly in only that specific manner, the ability to maintain that governing scheme, is itself the potential and probable victim of random events stemming from an insane population. Social structure and authority depend upon preventing randomness in favor of educated strategic planning. Once you lose that ability to ensure a specific future, you lose the ability to choose how you get to your future governing state and what happens afterward. In short, you die out as a method.

I agree that some specific things should be more random and far, far less manipulated, but trying to dictate randomness seems even more fatal than trying to dictate order. By dictating order, at least one has a chance to do it again. The trick is to promote the exact right type of order such that the result is altruistic, not egocentric. That isn't trivial at all, but what SAM Co-ops are designed to handle.

Unfortunately, the Occidental society becomes more and more random (anarchic, chaotic, "entropical“) or, as you say, "insane and either gets overtaken or dies“, or it just gets "frozen“ (when there is e.g. no interest anymore in overtaking it).
Last edited by Arminius on Sun Jul 30, 2017 8:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5214
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby WendyDarling » Sun Jul 30, 2017 5:10 pm

JSS wrote
It is a bit unclear as to why a candidate would be chosen who doesn't want to be in that position (which will turn out to be the more sane people).

Everyone who is a natural born, adult citizen who is free, not imprisoned of this country only, can be chosen. Any who are chosen may decline the responsibility to participate and serve, however they may be chosen again at some point in their future.

What is imprecise is first, the presumption that choosing comes from an above social authority and second, is reflected in the consequences of choosing randomly when the population is more insane than sane (including "undereducated").

First, our government is a social authority?
Second, that insanity would be inescapable whether the insane choose to run or are asked to, they still fill most seats of our governments but at least this way there is no built-in deception by the participants aka candidates/elected and way less corruption for there wouldn't be any party affiliations, no long term corporate buyouts by lobbyists, but every man or woman for himself for a two-four year term and they are recycled to be randomly chosen for the next higher up echelon of local, state, or national government. A government run on the fly as needed, long term projects would have to be continued by the newbies who entered the governing arena, in this way they could be reevaluated and improved before completed. I know...I'm being too positive. :-k If terms of service are staggered by years then there would always be a few more knowledgeable to help the newbies transition.

People who publicly choose to run for government are the worst of the worst these days. We need a new modus operandi.
Also, I like when citizens vote on bills. So the major bills would have to be streamlined without hundreds of pages of last, minute add-ons. Ten sentences describe the bill...and bam...done. Yea or nay people? People could vote via any interactive technology on a government agenda/happenings website.
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5582
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Tue Aug 01, 2017 8:35 pm

Let me put it this way:
For sake of governing people, you are given only the following choice to make:
    A) Maintain only that you are to always allow the combined wisdom of the entire world to make any serious decision.
    B) Presume one particular method (other than A above) to always be the best for every decision.

Which would you choose? Is democracy ALWAYS the best thing to do? Is Socialism, Communism, Kings, Religion? How do you know what is wisest at any given time? SAM Co-ops merely insist that one earnestly listen to the wisdom of all, before making decisions about governing others. How can you beat that?

In Sight of SAM, I Am
James S Saint wrote:
Arminius wrote:How can people of SAM defend themselves against corruption?

SAM is anentropic, the very essence of defense against entropy or corruption. People normally try to hope that their scheme for doing other things will not suffer corruption, but the "people of SAM" do nothing BUT defend themselves against corruption.

You eat so as to restore your health and spirit, diverting entropy/corruption. You work so as to gain the resources for eating. You sleep so as to rid your body of inadvertent corruption. You clean your body and house so as to dispense with corruption. In the long run, literally everything people do is actually merely the result of an attempt to maintain themselves, including sex, watching TV, eating too much, drugs, scheming, political activism,... everything. The problem is merely that that get confused and don't maintain very well.

The notion recently promoted in the last 400 years or so that the goal and purpose of life is "power" (WtP), is false and merely a social/psychological trick. And that is the real reason that so very many people are not Nietzschian nor Faustian. Life has never actually been about gaining power. The truth is rather that gaining power is for ensuring maintenance. But it is too easy for Man to confuse anti-entropy (the effort to grow) with an-entropy (the effort to maintain).

The focus must be maintained upon the actual goal/purpose. A degree of power must be sought, just as a degree of sex is required for reproduction. But that doesn't mean that anyone has to become manic about either. Power and sex (just as examples) serve only the purpose of ensuring the future maintenance.

Acquisition is not the goal. SAM maintains focus on Maintaining = Anentropy (anti-corruption). It does that through its decision making process which involves IJOT, an ongoing calculation of the eternal maintaining of joy throughout its populous.



Too many people now associate the word "Corporation" with malevolent money grubbing entities. SAM has nothing to do with money grubbing, so I changed to "Co-operative" or "Co-op".
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 1:32 am

The fundamental construct of the SAM Co-op is the CRH - Constitution for Rational Harmony:
Constitution for Rational Harmony - Restoring Sanity
For small gatherings;

Preamble
We who gather in this union ordain and establish these Articles of Rational Harmony for the purpose of firming the rational pursuit of maximum momentum toward eternal united harmony.

Articles
    1) Governing Authority
    All governing authority shall be vested in the following four fundamental offices; Representative, Senate, Executive, and Judicial.
      i. No action is to be performed by any office or member of any office unless by instigation of proper Constitutional process as documented herein.
      ii. It is the obligation of the union to prepare every member for reestablishing this authority in the event of its demise such as to include;
        a. Teaching the rationale of this constitution and methods concerning its establishment
        b. Providing all materials and tools required to re-initiate the authority of this constitution and its implementation.
        c. Training all members in concerns of confidence, anti-cancer, anti-terrorism, decisiveness, faith, and optimal isolation
      iii. It is the obligation of the union to provide sufficient preoccupation to offer resistance to corruption of critical harmony of both the union and the members without significantly infringing upon member rights to participate in constitutional decision-making.


    2) Member Representation
    The “Representative” office is to be responsible for the observation and documentation of the current situation of the union.
      i. Any union member shall be allowed to propose, through the Representative office, recommendations and suggestions concerning any union action as long as such items are accompanied by documented reasoning to support the proposal's need for consideration.
      ii. Any member must be allowed to debate the superiority of any existing or proposed rationale before the Senate and Judicial offices to the extent of rationale concern.
      iii. The Representative office is responsible for documenting and reporting on the situation of the members in regards to;
        a. Before and after relevant events
        b. Surroundings involved in events and member situations
        c. Higher and lower states of authority concerning events
        d. Higher and lower dependencies of relevant events


    3) Governing Principles
    The “Senate” office is to be responsible for receiving and evaluating all action proposals regarding any and all union members and establishing action priorities.
      i. Principles of rationale (amendments) are to be formulated, documented, and utilized in determining proposed rational actions.
      ii. These principles are to be published sufficiently to allow critical review by the other offices.
      iii. Proposals are to be evaluated for superior rationale with existing principles pertaining to the accomplishment of the goal of the maximum momentum toward eternal union harmony.
      iv. All alternative options to any proposal are to be rationally considered and documented along with the rationale for being rejected.
      v. All evaluations are to be accepted or rejected based on documented rational reasoning. Any rationale found to be superior to existing rationale must be incorporated into relevant executions replacing inferior rationales.
      vi. Any delays in processing must provide rationale for the delay. Any rationale for delay must conform to the same rules as any other proposal in being documented and open for public review.
      vii. A final execution plan is to be formed from all current rationale, which is then to be documented and presented to the Executive office for execution.

    4) Execution of Authority
    The “Executive” office is to be responsible for accurately implementing any and all execution plans received from the Senate. As such this office is in charge of all policing and manual efforts.


    5) Verification of Governing Rationale
    The “Judicial” office is to be responsible for verifying that all duties are being carried out as per Constitutional rationale and for arbitration of irresolvable dispute.
      i. All judicial actions are to be documented and remain open for membership rational counter-debate.

    6) Qualification for Station (Purity Issue)
    All office holders and members are to be qualified only by their ability to perform the associated duties of their position as determined by Judicially verified Senate rationale.
      i. The determination of ability to perform shall be made by Judicially verified Senate rationale and shall remain documented for rational membership review and update.

    7) Limit of Rational Authority (Extent Issue)
    The number of members governed by this constitution shall not exceed the ability of the Representative office to properly represent all members.


It is far more effective than living alone or with merely a partner simply because it offers an immediate "circle of close-nit friends" as well as a global network of strategies and information (the Angel Network). It is like having a doctor, lawyer, accountant, philosopher, and neurologist all in the family and dedicated to the "family".
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:23 am

James S Saint wrote:The fundamental construct of the SAM Co-op is the CRH - Constitution for Rational Harmony:
Constitution for Rational Harmony - Restoring Sanity
For small gatherings;

Preamble
We who gather in this union ordain and establish these Articles of Rational Harmony for the purpose of firming the rational pursuit of maximum momentum toward eternal united harmony.

Articles
    1) Governing Authority
    All governing authority shall be vested in the following four fundamental offices; Representative, Senate, Executive, and Judicial.
      i. No action is to be performed by any office or member of any office unless by instigation of proper Constitutional process as documented herein.
      ii. It is the obligation of the union to prepare every member for reestablishing this authority in the event of its demise such as to include;
        a. Teaching the rationale of this constitution and methods concerning its establishment
        b. Providing all materials and tools required to re-initiate the authority of this constitution and its implementation.
        c. Training all members in concerns of confidence, anti-cancer, anti-terrorism, decisiveness, faith, and optimal isolation
      iii. It is the obligation of the union to provide sufficient preoccupation to offer resistance to corruption of critical harmony of both the union and the members without significantly infringing upon member rights to participate in constitutional decision-making.


    2) Member Representation
    The “Representative” office is to be responsible for the observation and documentation of the current situation of the union.
      i. Any union member shall be allowed to propose, through the Representative office, recommendations and suggestions concerning any union action as long as such items are accompanied by documented reasoning to support the proposal's need for consideration.
      ii. Any member must be allowed to debate the superiority of any existing or proposed rationale before the Senate and Judicial offices to the extent of rationale concern.
      iii. The Representative office is responsible for documenting and reporting on the situation of the members in regards to;
        a. Before and after relevant events
        b. Surroundings involved in events and member situations
        c. Higher and lower states of authority concerning events
        d. Higher and lower dependencies of relevant events


    3) Governing Principles
    The “Senate” office is to be responsible for receiving and evaluating all action proposals regarding any and all union members and establishing action priorities.
      i. Principles of rationale (amendments) are to be formulated, documented, and utilized in determining proposed rational actions.
      ii. These principles are to be published sufficiently to allow critical review by the other offices.
      iii. Proposals are to be evaluated for superior rationale with existing principles pertaining to the accomplishment of the goal of the maximum momentum toward eternal union harmony.
      iv. All alternative options to any proposal are to be rationally considered and documented along with the rationale for being rejected.
      v. All evaluations are to be accepted or rejected based on documented rational reasoning. Any rationale found to be superior to existing rationale must be incorporated into relevant executions replacing inferior rationales.
      vi. Any delays in processing must provide rationale for the delay. Any rationale for delay must conform to the same rules as any other proposal in being documented and open for public review.
      vii. A final execution plan is to be formed from all current rationale, which is then to be documented and presented to the Executive office for execution.

    4) Execution of Authority
    The “Executive” office is to be responsible for accurately implementing any and all execution plans received from the Senate. As such this office is in charge of all policing and manual efforts.


    5) Verification of Governing Rationale
    The “Judicial” office is to be responsible for verifying that all duties are being carried out as per Constitutional rationale and for arbitration of irresolvable dispute.
      i. All judicial actions are to be documented and remain open for membership rational counter-debate.

    6) Qualification for Station (Purity Issue)
    All office holders and members are to be qualified only by their ability to perform the associated duties of their position as determined by Judicially verified Senate rationale.
      i. The determination of ability to perform shall be made by Judicially verified Senate rationale and shall remain documented for rational membership review and update.

    7) Limit of Rational Authority (Extent Issue)
    The number of members governed by this constitution shall not exceed the ability of the Representative office to properly represent all members.


It is far more effective than living alone or with merely a partner simply because it offers an immediate "circle of close-nit friends" as well as a global network of strategies and information (the Angel Network). It is like having a doctor, lawyer, accountant, philosopher, and neurologist all in the family and dedicated to the "family".



All individuals have different conflicting self serving interests therefore common mutual interests for everybody equally is a lie or delusional thinking at its finest.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:43 am

Otto_West wrote:..common mutual interests for everybody equally is a lie or delusional thinking at its finest.

Who said anything about "common mutual interests for everybody equally"?

There is no such thing as "equal" except in mathematics. There are definitely "common mutual interests" among small groups, else there would be no small groups. SAM is merely a means to bring sanity and learning into the picture.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby WendyDarling » Thu Aug 03, 2017 12:13 pm

With a SAM Co-op, everyone is always an active member, but not necessarily an officer?

How is corruption avoided in a SAM scenario?

Isn't 50 ppl. about 25 too many?

I still don't understand how it would be set up, with self or group nominations and elections?
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5582
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 2:53 pm

WendyDarling wrote:With a SAM Co-op, everyone is always an active member, but not necessarily an officer?

True. And they can switch around. It remains up to them.

WendyDarling wrote:How is corruption avoided in a SAM scenario?

Primarily because everything is "open-source". The reasoning for doing anything and everything is not only formally stated, but required to be upheld as stated. No matter what you are doing, the reason for it must be satisfied. Vague ambiguity of purpose or intent is strongly avoided (verification of satisfaction is usually required). And then on top of that, everything is always open for deeper inquiry to investigate better reasoning. Usually the initial reasoning for doing anything isn't the best reasoning and often isn't the best plan, so in light of new ideas or information, change is but one formal discussion away. A single person in a single day can potentially change the entire game .. other than the SAM Constitution.

WendyDarling wrote:Isn't 50 ppl. about 25 too many?

For some, but not others. A SAM Co-op only requires 4 members to initiate the fundamental structure, after that, it is a matter of maintaining representation, awareness, and resources. Just as parts of your body would atrophy if the nerves and blood become too restricted, if a group grows too large, people become too unattached to what is really going on and why. Purpose in living gets confused and conflated when people are not involved in the reasoning or not properly represented. How attached do you feel to Congress?

WendyDarling wrote:I still don't understand how it would be set up, with self or group nominations and elections?

Initially it is by whatever reasoning the initial members can muster up. It doesn't really matter why or even how stupid they might be. After the structure is formed decisions begin taking on rationality and who moves into what position is up to that rationale. And of course, what rationale is first chosen is seldom the best, so later it can all change again .. but always via the congressional/parliamentary procedure of open debate.

Since MIJOT, Maximum Integral of Joy Over Time, is the "supreme goal", all reasoning is based upon that concern. And any reasoning that proves to be better at achieving that goal gets immediately implemented. Voting or even your "random assignments" can be a part of the better reasoning concerning many issues, as long as the highest authority remains as the SAM structure. In other words, voting or random assignments can only be implimented as long as the proper reasoning proved them to be the better way to handle the specific situation.

Between the required open-source reasoning and the goal of MIJOT, the group becomes very stable. The only issue is that new comers come from such an extremely different society, they can't quite comprehend it for a while. Once accustom to it, it is almost too easy. People expect problems that never arise; (e.g. "Don't I have to campaign or gather a petition?" - Not at all).
Last edited by James S Saint on Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:14 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:..common mutual interests for everybody equally is a lie or delusional thinking at its finest.

Who said anything about "common mutual interests for everybody equally"?

There is no such thing as "equal" except in mathematics. There are definitely "common mutual interests" among small groups, else there would be no small groups. SAM is merely a means to bring sanity and learning into the picture.

Without equality mutuality is a lie. There is cooperation where people have the same goals or aspirations working together but there is no sense thing as mutual benefit because nobody benefits from anything in the same manner. Cooperation can be voluntary but usually it is coerced.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 3:18 pm

Otto_West wrote:Without equality mutuality is a lie.

?? That doesn't seem to make sense. On a hot day, a man and his dog find a supply of water. The need and refreshment are "mutual", yet they are hardly equal.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Otto_West » Thu Aug 03, 2017 5:25 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:Without equality mutuality is a lie.

?? That doesn't seem to make sense. On a hot day, a man and his dog find a supply of water. The need and refreshment are "mutual", yet they are hardly equal.

But they benefit differently, it's one of the biggest pet peeves I have with the word mutual.
Your entire world of fantasy and make believe is doomed, have a nice day.
User avatar
Otto_West
Doom Pornographer
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 7:40 pm
Location: Dumbfuckistan- Will Work For (FRN) Shekels.

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:26 pm

Otto_West wrote:But they benefit differently, it's one of the biggest pet peeves I have with the word mutual.

Such might have been inferred by someone, but "mutual benefit" has never meant "benefit equally". It merely means that both parties benefit, perhaps in different ways, perhaps different amounts (in exact measure, always different amounts).
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Meno_ » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:42 pm

James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:But they benefit differently, it's one of the biggest pet peeves I have with the word mutual.

Such might have been inferred by someone, but "mutual benefit" has never meant "benefit equally".
It merely means that both parties benefit, perhaps in different ways, perhaps different amounts (in exact measure, always different amounts).


On its face, this is feasible. But there is a downside to benefit, and if the above implication is to be considered, (a few comments ago), then after the 50-50 split is passed, one will benefit more, while the other less; or, its losses will exceed the benefits. At that point 'it' will try to cut losses and withdraw. Generally speaking, this makes sense.

But this does not make too much sense to those of democratic leanings.
Meno_
Philosopher
 
Posts: 2234
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby James S Saint » Thu Aug 03, 2017 6:51 pm

Meno_ wrote:
James S Saint wrote:
Otto_West wrote:But they benefit differently, it's one of the biggest pet peeves I have with the word mutual.

Such might have been inferred by someone, but "mutual benefit" has never meant "benefit equally".
It merely means that both parties benefit, perhaps in different ways, perhaps different amounts (in exact measure, always different amounts).


On its face, this is feasible. But there is a downside to benefit, and if the above implication is to be considered, (a few comments ago), then after the 50-50 split is passed, one will benefit more, while the other less; or, its losses will exceed the benefits. At that point 'it' will try to cut losses and withdraw. Generally speaking, this makes sense.

But this does not make too much sense to those of democratic leanings.

1) What "50-50 split"?
2) I am talking about the bottom line benefit, not merely half of the picture.
3) "You got more than me so I'm not going to play anymore" is a bit childish. Let him sit out to grow up.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25076
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby Arminius » Fri Aug 04, 2017 12:31 am

AutSider wrote:Image

This is interesting. One could make the argument that even in a democracy there are still people who disagree with the politicians in power, so they must have some level of protection. But then how come that "authoritarian" leaders who supposedly oppress the general population are so well liked that they interact openly and physically with the people?

I think the answer may lie in the fact that in democracies, although technically everybody has a vote nobody's vote influences politics to a significant extent, so all other factors equal, people are just as unhappy/happy as in authoritarian societies. Seriously, what's the big difference between not being able to vote and having 0% influence and being able to vote and having 0.000001% or so influence? It's completely insignificant.

One big difference between authoritarian and democratic societies is that in authoritarian societies, since it is made clear that politicians have power and the people do not, all responsibility will be placed on politicians and if they do a bad job, woe be unto them - the people may get pissed off and riot, or even start a revolution and overthrow the authoritarian government.
But in democratic governments if politicians do bad things, they will not be held responsible because you, the average Joe, supposedly picked them, even though you practically had no influence on who gets picked. So people tend to put undue responsibility and blame on themselves which prevents them from questioning and overthrowing a corrupt political order because it gives them an illusion of choice and thus responsibility for that choice.

Voting only truly matters if it is restricted to a small portion of the population so that each individual vote has a reasonable influence on the outcome. Otherwise it's just a sham to keep people obedient and sheepish.

Yes, and it is because of the support of the almost unknown real rulers having nothing to do with democracy.

Voting is only good for a small group - up to tribes (at the most!).

For example: The Ancient German or the Ancient Gallican tribes voted just because of the same interests they had as a small group. If the number of each of their tribes had not been as small as it had been, then the most votings would not work well or only work in the case of a same interest of something like a nation. Examples are (1) the unseccessful of almost all Gallican tribes under Vercingetorix against the Romans in the year 58 BC and (2) the successful war of almost all German tribes under Arminius against the Romans in the year 9. Almost all of those tribes were united for a relatively short time because they had a common interest, but the tribes - and thus: not the nation - had decided this by voting. If they had already been a real nation, then they would have decided like the current nations do today: according to the corruption.

But where do we have such tribes today? There are not really such tribes anymore (and "gangs“ are no tribes in the traditional sense). That is the problem too, namely of the whole world of today.
Image
User avatar
Arminius
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 5214
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 10:51 pm
Location: Saltus Teutoburgiensis

Re: Democratic vs undemocratic

Postby WendyDarling » Fri Aug 04, 2017 1:45 am

WendyDarling wrote:
I still don't understand how it would be set up, with self or group nominations and elections?

JSS wrote:
Initially it is by whatever reasoning the initial members can muster up. It doesn't really matter why or even how stupid they might be. After the structure is formed decisions begin taking on rationality and who moves into what position is up to that rationale. And of course, what rationale is first chosen is seldom the best, so later it can all change again .. but always via the congressional/parliamentary procedure of open debate.

Since MIJOT, Maximum Integral of Joy Over Time, is the "supreme goal", all reasoning is based upon that concern. And any reasoning that proves to be better at achieving that goal gets immediately implemented. Voting or even your "random assignments" can be a part of the better reasoning concerning many issues, as long as the highest authority remains as the SAM structure. In other words, voting or random assignments can only be implimented as long as the proper reasoning proved them to be the better way to handle the specific situation.

I don't understand how corrupt leaders would be weeded out before any damage is incurred. Also, everything up for debate must be sited in written form first (following a standard of reason with evidence/proof)? Who decides what standard is approved? I guess I'm still not understanding this and how it would work with very small groups (of 4 ppl.) and very large groups (of 50 ppl.)? Are these co-ops made up of a few families in your mind?
I AM OFFICIALLY IN HELL!

I live my philosophy, it's personal to me and people who engage where I live establish an unspoken dynamic, a relationship of sorts, with me and my philosophy.

Cutting folks for sport is a reality for the poor in spirit. I myself only cut the poor in spirit on Tues., Thurs., and every other Sat.
User avatar
WendyDarling
Heroine
 
Posts: 5582
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Hades

Next

Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot]