#376_2E: How every citizen could co-rule his own country (part 2)
(Continuation from the previous "part 1" of this post #376E)
{1#C3} Change to the opposite, because to "adding", of the previous typically "subtractive" functions and goals of governments. As analyses of totalizm prove, the main reason for the gradual descent into decline of almost all governments on Earth is the "monopoly" of governments on governing. This monopoly causes that only on the motivations and philosophy of politicians leading a given government it depends: whether it as a whole will succumb to the temptations of "subtractive" actions, or whether it will act "adding" for the good of the entire nation. This is why in practice governments with a total "adding" action and "fruits" appear very rarely. For example, in my entire life I personally had the honour of experiencing only one such government, i.e. the New Zealand of Sir Robert Muldoon (see https://www.google.co.nz/search?q=Sir+Robert+Muldoon ) which I described in #B1 of my autobiographical web page "pajak_jan_uk.htm". His rule impressed me greatly for a number of reasons, for example because governing over New Zealanders is a difficult challenge and in order to generate "adding fruit" through one's rule it is necessary to impose engineering restrictions and requirements on everything that is used, while nations accustomed to prosperity typically do NOT like to comply with any requirements or restrictions. So in order to eliminate the operation of a government on the principles of "monopoly", and thus to remove many of its flaws, totalizm requires the simultaneous use of more than one government. When there are at least two governments at the same time, and for additional assurance of their "adding" nature they will be expanded by also at least two a superior to them "verification offices" described in #C4 below, then each of them will mutually compensate through the self-regulation bad consequences in the remaining governments and eliminate their shortcomings - just as in machines this is done by two different mechanisms operating simultaneously, e.g. of the type "differential mechanism" and wheels in cars, and as I explain this in more detail in #A2.11 from my web page "totalizm.htm", as well as in posts #283E, #280E and #351E to blogs of totalizm. The establishment of more than one government operating simultaneously, to strengthen the trust in them through the support of "verification offices" that are superior towards these governments, will allow to eliminate from the current "subtracting" governments over today's nations the role that the government "take" all decisions, while the nation must execute these decisions. Therefore, in totaliztic "adding" governments, it would be the nation that would "take" all decisions, while the government would only implement them. Therefore, the functions and goals of governments in the eras of the previous "subtractive" parasitism in government, in the future humanity surviving the possibility of self-destruction, in almost all nations would be drastically changed to "adding" functions and goals of new totaliztic governments with completely opposite (oppositely oriented) functions, goals and methods of action to those previously practiced.
{2#C3} Incorporating the "collective wisdom" (and the rights to conduct checks) of all citizens of a given nation into government decision-making, with the most "adding" method of introducing any changes that decide the fate of that nation. Since in the eyes of God all people are equal, therefore in totaliztic governance each person should have the right and privilege to participate in making decisions that will then concern them and affect them in many different ways. In order to implement such governance, it is enough that for each problem troubling the nation, each of the simultaneously serving governments would develop a proposal and a description summarizing about it: "what" in their opinion would solve that problem and "how" they would implement that solution. After the "verifying offices" checks whether this proposal and description does NOT violate any of the requirements and restrictions of "adding" governance, twice (or even only once) a year, these descriptions would be made available for review by the entire nation and submitted to an online public vote. The government whose description wins this vote would implement its proposal, while for winning the vote would receive a "discretionary credit" described below in {5#C3}.
{3#C3} Today's technology, e.g. universal access to "internet voting", allows every citizen to participate in decision-making: the creators of which of the alternatives proposed by governments currently in power, in the eyes of citizens deserve the right to implement it in a given country. Humanity already has methods, means, and technical devices (i.e. the Internet) for every citizen of a given nation to participate in making all decisions concerning that nation. It is enough for at least two simultaneously elected and competing governments to only develop those at least two alternatives "what" and "how" are to be implemented, and each of the citizens - i.e. voting participants, would have a password for their own decision-making vote, hence everyone would choose which of those at least two alternatives they would vote for, and then cast their vote for it via their own computer or modern telephone with the Internet (or with a future equivalent of the Internet).
Here it should be emphasized that in voting for the choice of the alternative to be implemented, the principle of "addition" and the existence of "free will" (see the web page "will.htm") require that each voter also have one more decision option, namely: "I do NOT agree" to the implementation of what we are voting for in the current formulation of "what" and "how". But only if the number of votes with this "I do NOT agree" exceeds the highest number of votes for the implementation of one of the governments' alternatives, then it would be justified by the nation that the governments would have to either abandon this implementation altogether, or reformulate its "what" and "how" to better "additively" serve the given nation. Note that the previous "subtractive" governments on Earth also allegedly made such an option "I do NOT agree" available to citizens in the so-called general "referenda" or "plebiscites", but unfortunately, as I describe in #B5.1 and #G4 of my web page "will.htm", they implemented the result only in cases when it was in line with their intentions and served their interests hidden from the nation. But in the case of an opposite result of the referendum or plebiscite, they simply ignored its result, as I described in the above #B5.1 of the web page "will.htm".
{4#C3} Even the smallest nation should have at least two simultaneously and competitively operating governments, while after a population of more than 10 million, the number of simultaneously operating governments could increase proportionally, but NOT exceed the "voter patience limit" (probably 4). In order for the participants of a given nation to have a choice (and then the possibility of choosing) at least two alternatives stating "what" and "how" should be implemented, each nation should have at least two competing governments. The entire composition of all of these candidate governments, the proposal of which would be to elect them in their entirety, to cause agreement and harmony in their later joint government work, would be determined by their leaders before the elections. The leader of the candidate government for voting could be any of the citizens - today's expensive, wasteful and corruption-prone political parties would NOT exist then. Once this composition is published before the election, the governments would be put to a vote in their entirety (if necessary, in more than one round of voting). If they received the most votes out of all such candidate government proposals, then they would be considered democratically elected by such remote computer voting, thus receiving the people's mandate to take up their office.
Unfortunately, we know that sometimes people whom others like and will vote for, may NOT have what it takes to prove themselves in work and in real life. This can also happen to governments (or "verification offices"). So if a situation were to arise that in a year's voting, all the proposals put to the vote by a given set of governments (or "verification offices") for solving the country's problems were rejected with those "I do NOT agree" votes from {3#C3} above, then it would be a sign that these governments (or offices) are incompetent. Thus, the elected simultaneously with the voting a new set of governments (or "verification offices") should be immediately sworn into office, and these incompetent governments (or offices) that have lost contact with the people of their nation should be immediately removed.
{5#C3} The government that would develop the "what" and "how" of solutions to the nation's problem put to a vote by citizens, which would receive the most votes, would be awarded special "discretionary credits" - the highest accumulation of which would allow them to remain in the role of government for the next term. In order for the participants of each of the existing governments over a given nation to have an incentive to carefully refine the "what" and "how" of solving the problems of that nation, each of these governments would "earn credits" to extend the term of its government each time the "what" and "how" developed by it won a given vote by the participants of that nation entitled to a decisive vote. In turn, after the end of the term of the given governments, the one government that would accumulate the most "credits" for winning the vote would remain unchanged for the next term - provided, however, that the number of these terms for any government would NOT exceed three (i.e. a given government and all of its members could serve at most three terms). However, those or that government which accumulated a smaller amount of these credits would be dissolved. In their place, in elections held simultaneously with the voting, an entirely new government and its entire new personnel would be elected instead of the government that was dissolved at that time. Each citizen of a given country could stand in the elections as a candidate for the government at most twice in his/her entire life, and therefore would have only two chances in his/her entire life to win these elections and become a member of one of the governments chosen to govern. Since 6 elections (or at least 3) would be held during the 3-year term of each set of governments, each citizen could put his candidacy forward in only one of those 6 elections - see {2#C4} below. Even if money were still used in the country (as opposed to the "nirvana political system" described in #C7 to #C9 of the web page "nirvana.htm"), still submitting a candidacy for these elections should be free of charge, although each candidate citizen would have to meet all the requirements for candidates (e.g. NOT have a previous criminal record - even NOT just a traffic offence, still have their first wife or husband, be a citizen of this country, collect signatures of 3 citizens who are NOT family members but support the candidacy of that person and attest to his/her "adding" character, complete all formalities related to this candidacy, assume the responsibility of this candidacy, etc.).
The government that, after its term of office has ended, is proven by any of the "verification offices" to have NOT kept a certain promise publicly made to voters before the election, would have a certain amount of credits taken from its final number of "discretionary credits" because of the failure to keep that promise, and those credits would be added to the "verification offices" that were the first to reveal the failure to keep that promise during the implementation vote and would most certainly reveal it to the voters and prove it to the government in question. The "verification office" that would accumulate the most "discretionary credits" and whose verification merits were confirmed by the voters would remain in office for the next term.
{6#C3} This government, which would win the vote on the "what" and "how" to solve the problem currently troubling a given nation, would also implement its proposal of "how" to implement it. This transfer of solutions for implementation by their government authors would have many advantages. For example, each government would propose a realistic solution that it would be ready to implement itself within three years of its term (of course by choosing, employing and supervising professional companies that would complete this solution). In addition, this would force governments to include in their staff people with significant expertise, knowledge, morality and a list of life successes. However, in the event of NOT fully and completely implementing of given solution during its term, this government would have its "discretionary credits" for this solution taken away - which would additionally force governments to the most realistic solutions and election promises, and to divide into smaller stages the promises to implement the more labour-intensive projects, such as the construction of Magnocraft starships described on the web page "magnocraft.htm".
{7#C3} Totalizm suggests that in order to avoid cronyism and to increase efficiency, each government would consist of precisely 7 (seven) people - i.e. a number considered sacred in the Bible, and proven in practice over many years to be the most optimal by the governments of Switzerland - see https://www.google.com/search?q=how+many+members+swiss+government . If, for any reason, the number of participants in a given government decreased (e.g. death, illness, accident, removal by that government, removal by a "verification office" e.g. due to improper behaviour, etc.), the government would have the right to make its own decision (i.e. without an additional vote) whom from the governments already voted for at that time that led in the previously held elections, to additionally "borrow" for the missing seats, and then "give them back" for the next term (which "giveback" could, but would NOT have to, take place, because up until the last vote of a given term, each voted government could be defeated by another one later voted for). The term of office of each group of governments would last 3 years (one of the governments of a given group could extend it up to three terms, i.e. up to 9 years, by twice winning "discretionary credits"). After three years, the entire membership of the government (or those from among governments) that had accumulated fewer than the best of the governments in terms of "credits" for voting on their policies, would be replaced by an entirely new government (or governments) elected by a vote of the entire nation.
I will not hide here that I personally dream of such a way of governing, and that I personally would like to live in a nation governed in this way. I also personally believe that if I had managed, as I intended, to stand and win the presidential elections in Poland in 2015 (see my web page "pajak_na_prezydenta_2015.htm"), when my ideas of perfecting everything were multiplying in my mind, then perhaps "adding" governments, such as those described here, would have ruled Poland and built its power and world-significance already for almost 10 years. In fact, I also challenge each of the readers here, whether he/she would be able to work out an even more "adding" idea of the "government of the future" than my described here. If he/she manages to achieve this, then he/she deserves to become the president of his/her own country, and I will confirm (reinforce) the excellence of his/her candidacy with honour and pleasure.
Since this is only my first (thus necessarily brief) written presentation of this idea of "rule and government for our future", if God grants me the required time and health, then in my future works I will describe it in more detail. After all, each new creative idea requires significant work to develop its details with the engineering procedure of "how" and then present it sensibly to the readers, while for now I am mainly concentrating on an optimal, although brief, presentation of the whole of my "added", improved and extended version of the philosophy of Totalizm2020.
#C4, blog #376E. Why in the "adding" totaliztic government will there also be at least two independent "verification offices" that will supervise the correctness and constitutionality of the entire election and voting process, including, for example, preparing their "opinions" for voters on the "what" and "how" being put to the voting, and their opinions will also be voted on by the entire nation for "discretionary credits", hence, for example, after the term of office of a given set of governments, also each of the "verification offices" that collects a smaller number of "discretionary credits" than the leading office will be dissolved, and in its place will be elected the next "verification offices" for a 3-year term, but each with a chance to extend its term twice with the winning number of "discretionary credits":
Motto: "The fish rots starting from the head" and "nothing disappears, but only changes its owner" and also "trust people, but at the same time take their jewels in pawn." (Explanation of this motto: When I was still living in communist Poland, I often heard the above old Polish proverbs that "the fish rots starting from the head", and that "nothing disappears, but only changes its owner". I also heard this recommendation about "believing people, but always taking their jewels in pawn" - supposedly authored by Vladimir Lenin himself. I believe in his authorship, because one has to be a wise and objective realist to organize, carry out and win the greatest revolution in the history of the Earth and humanity - the effects of which botched only his successors later, although they could have, for example, improved them in a way similar to the one described here and thanks to this also took over leadership over the entire world later. Nevertheless, to the inhabitants of our "subtractive" world full of lies, corruption, injustice and violence, this recommendation of Lenin wittily indicates one of the ways "how" to compensate for the fact that all people are imperfect. By being imperfect, people take an example from the rulers and the elites (i.e. from that "fish head") to commit various sins and evil - which is also emphasized in the Bible, e.g. see its verses: 3:23-24 and 5:8 from the "Letter to the Romans", 51:5 "Psalms", or 2:1-5 "Ephesians". For example, they replace with themselves the previous owners of resources and goods or money, or "taking the jewels in pawn" keep their neighbours in subjection and obedience, etc. Although in governing nations, these sins and evil were supposed to be remedied, e.g. by separation the executive power from the law, but unfortunately even this is distorted to this day almost all over the world. Therefore, if the principles of governance described in the above item #C3 are implemented, then taking into account human imperfections and the need to balance them in governance, it will also be necessary to establish special types of "verification offices" that are superior to governments and above the power of such governments. I have already described these offices in my publications linked by their Polish name "urząd weryfikujący" through the Polish-language web page named "skorowidz.htm", e.g. see INTRODUCTION and item #A3 from the web page "pajak_dla_prezydentury_2020.htm", and I am developing their idea in more detail in this item #C4.)
The governments described here would be incomplete if there were NOT at least one pair of offices superior to governments. These offices would check their compliance of "how" with the requirements of "adding" procedures in everything that concerns these governments. They would therefore check whether "adding" is NOT only the decisions and actions taken by these governments and the fulfilment of undertaken commitments (e.g. pre-election promises), but also the everyday actions of their members (and especially their moral exemplarity, which is to be an "adding" example for the rest of the nation), as well as the effectiveness and efficiency in implementing decisions already made. In other words, these offices would make sure that both the governments and these offices themselves, in accordance with the well-known proverb "nobility obliges" (in Polish stating: "szlachectwo zobowiązuje"), were for the entire country and nation an example and model of "adding" procedures representing it - that is, a model for "the best among the best". That is why these offices would be the highest offices in a given country - equivalent in their power to today's offices of the president or leader of the country. All governments of this country would therefore be subordinate to them. In the publications of totalizm I call them "verification office". They would be elected by the same procedures as members of new governments and at the same times and the same elections as members of these governments, and in the same number of 7 persons as members of governments. However, their task will NOT be to govern, but will be to supervise that everything concerning governments is "additive", and also to disclose to voters at the times designated for each subsequent vote any facts that may raise any concerns that they are acting in a "subtractive" way.
Let us now briefly describe the most important information about this "verification office". Here it is:
{1#C4} Everything in this project that concerns governments applies in exactly the same way to "verification offices" and vice versa. In other words, the procedures for their election, the 7-person number, requirements, times and methods of voting, use of "discretionary credits", remuneration paid equally to each of their participants for work should be exactly the same for "verification offices" as for governments (i.e. in the period before a given country introduces the "Nirvana Political System" - see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9YFI6Fer9E and focuses on building people's happiness like the country of Bhutan - see https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bhutan+happiest+country+in+the+world ), etc. The only differences will be that these offices will have a different general name and duties, and during voting and viewing in computers of the "fruits" of their activities, everything that concerns them will be clearly separated from everything that concerns governments.
{2#C4} In order to minimize the inconvenience and disruption to the vital procedures of the people introduced by the civic privilege and honour of voting by the entire nation, for everything concerning both governments and "verification offices," only two votes would be held each year at exactly the same time - each vote at an interval of 6 months from the previous one. Consequently, during each 3-year term of office of these governments and offices, there would be 6 such country-wide votes. In each of these 6 votes there would also be an election between the candidates who had been nominated in the meantime for the next term of office of the governments and verification offices - except that such candidates and their participants who had been voted on in the earlier of these elections could NOT be voted on again in the later elections of the same term. Since the potential for introducing evil is significant during computer voting, in order to enable the "verification office" (as well as, for example, voting citizens, or journalists) to check whether each of the votes cast is true and valid, has been properly counted, and cast in accordance with the law, each of these votes would be accompanied by an identification number allowing it to be checked later in every possible respect. This number should enable identification and checking, among other things, the legitimacy and existence of the person who cast it, hence, for example, for Poland it could be the PESEL number, for the US social security, and for NZ its IRD. This would prevent the computer versions of situations that are usually described with sarcastic stories, e.g. that during the vote-counting the electricity suddenly goes out, and when the electricity problem is fixed, in the place where the counting is taking place, counting people can notice a significant increase in the stack of boxes with votes already cast to be counted - but the authorities organizing the elections did NOT inform at all later that, for example, 320% of the population of a given country took part in the vote. Since in the government described here, each voter would know their number attached to their vote, and the voting results would be available to all citizens on the Internet for the next 60 years, each citizen could also check online whether their vote was really assigned to these voted-decisions and candidates they actually voted for. Only the required number of candidates for governments and the above-mentioned offices who received the highest number of votes from a given vote would also have a chance to qualify for the next set of governments and verification offices - but only if the number of votes cast for them exceeded the number of votes cast for candidates either already elected in previous elections for a given term, or elected in later elections for that term. That is, candidates who lost any election for a given term by less than the highest number of votes would be eliminated from participation in governments or the above-mentioned verification offices for the next term, and from the chance of being added to (as replacement) in the current term. In total, therefore, the candidates who received the highest number of votes from all 6 votes and elections for a given term would be elected to the next term. All election and voting results would then be kept, protected from changes, and available to citizens of the country for the next at least 60 years. And they could even last longer, for example by forming special "museum institutes for studying governments and rulers", where every researcher, journalist, or citizen would also have the right and conditions to study the history and decisions of the governments of a given country. Their long availability would increase the responsibility of governments and offices, and would inspire their improvements - something that today's elections lack (at present votes are usually quickly destroyed precisely so that NO one would have access to them later). All voting days would be days off from work. Voting would be computerized and particularly well-developed in terms of "user friendliness" - see https://www.google.com/search?q=user+friendliness (in the Polish language called "łatwości obsługi" meaning "ease of use" - see https://www.google.pl/search?q=%C5%82atwo%C5%9B%C4%87+obs%C5%82ugi ). Each currently serving government and each of the "verification offices" would appear in these voting programs under a name representing it with a maximum length of 49 characters (including spaces), i.e. with a length equal to 7x7 characters (remember that 7 is a "holy number"). Each 7-person government and office would choose its own name - trying to emphasize everything it represents, and differing by at least one letter from names already registered as used in a previous government (or a "verification office"). For example, if I were to put my candidacy together with 6 other well-known totalizts for one of these governments, then for Poland I would choose for our government, for example, the name: Totalizm na wszystko ustrój nirwany i magnokrafty (meaning: Totalizm for everything Nirvana System Magnocraft) - which in my opinion would well represent everything that we would try to present for consideration by voters as characteristic of our candidacy for one of the totaliztic governments. Under such a name chosen by each government and office, it would be in all his publications, advertisements, and references to it. After all, the Polish saying meaning "words have power" (in Polish: "słowa mają moc" - see "https://www.google.pl/search?q=słowa+mają+moc ) reveals to us that different words have different powers and that they telepathically radiate their power to our minds. To convince ourselves that such "power of words" really exists, it is enough to compare pairs of words with similar meanings, e.g. the name mustang horses with the name Australian brumbies, (see their descriptions at https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=mustang+horses , https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=australian+brumbies ), and then listen to the internal reactions that they trigger in us. Hence, if this "power of words" persuaded voters to click on a given name, voters would see similarly short names for everything that would describe this candidate for government, or what the government with this name would, for example, put to a vote. If, on the other hand, these names "what" for governments and procedures "how" put to a vote had sufficient "power of words", then the voter would familiarize themselves with the given proposals, and if these convinced them, then they would choose the option of casting their citizen's vote for this government (or office). If, on the other hand, the voter wanted to know more about any of this information, by clicking on it he/she would obtain increasingly detailed information - which he/she could also order his/her computer to read aloud.
{3#C4} Each government and each "verification office" would bear collective responsibility for everything related to it during its term of office, and each of the 7 participants in this government and office would also bear similar personal responsibility. Hence, if, for example, it was proven that it was lying, failing to keep pre-election promises, corrupt, or immoral, e.g. for personal gain, breaking the 10 commandments of God, etc., then it (or he/she) would immediately be removed from the government or office, and some other already elected government or person would take its (or his/her) place as a supplement. Such replacement appointment in the place of removed or lost government or person would be one who had already been elected before that moment in time and with the number of votes that already was cast (this is to introduce so-called "randomness" to these replacements, which in critical situations would be decided by all-knowing God, or by so-called "fate" - if one is disbeliever), thus who was waiting to take up office or to be replace by someone with the higher number of votes up in this round of voting, or to be able to become such a supplement (these potential needs of supplements would motivate people to put forward their candidacy already in earlier votes of a given term of office). In the event of later detection of any of such prohibited conducts, this responsibility would NOT expire regardless of how many years have passed since the term of office of a given government, office, or person - which would additionally increase the responsibility of governments and offices.
#C5, blog #376E. Advantages and disadvantages of the totaliztic governments and methods of governing described here, which serve to their nations in the "adding" manner:
Motto: 'In order for human thought structures (such as computer programs, political systems, ideologies, scientific theories, inventions, etc.) to have an "adding" effect in real life, it is NOT enough for someone to describe them on paper, as did, for example, Darwin, Marx, or Einstein (after all, according to an old Polish proverb: "paper is patient and accepts everything that someone writes on it" - even the greatest nonsense). For these structures to truly bear "adding" fruit, they must meet a set of very detailed requirements set for them in accordance with "absolute truth" and with engineering "how" procedures (i.e. similar to the requirements that engineers set for correctly functioning machines), and furthermore, the people forming these thought structures, when carrying out actions to implement these structures in real life, must also create "adding motivations" in their minds, which will convince God residing both in their bodies and in the universe around them, that these people deserve to have entire realities in such "adding" way manifested especially for them.' (Explanations of this motto: the above truth, which as the first researcher in the world I was to implement into my thought structures, such as my "adding" philosophy of totalizm, described also on the web page "totalizm2020_uk.htm", or my Theory of Everything from 1985, the Nirvana Political System from 1998, the Theory of Life from 2020, or the invention of the "Magnocraft" starships from 1980 - each of which forms a never-ending "Ariadne's Thread" which, through its cause-and-effect connections with other truths, leads humanity towards the infinite development of truths from the so-called "skeleton of knowledge and truth" which I described in #B3 and #H1 of my web page named "will.htm" and in the blog of totalizm number #337E. It is just thanks to my realization and implementation of the above truth in the thought structures I create, that I personally claim that all correctly functioning ideas that are NOT machines, still must be continually improved and in accordance with the truths of life, just as engineers improve the machines they build - more information on improving ideas just as machines are improved, is included in {1#M1} from item #M1 on the web page "god.htm" or from blog #374E, and also in items #A1 and #A2 from the web page "totalizm2020_uk.htm" or from blog #375E.)
It is enough to look around to understand that the too long stagnation in efforts to improve and reform everything that concerns the lives of people in our "world of matter" causes the "powers of evil" to learn "how" to gradually and imperceptibly corrupt this life. There are many reasons for this, and I have already explained some of them in the publications of totalizm. For this proposal to reform governments and governance, the fact that such corruption is constantly occurring has the consequence that it makes the reform described here all the more necessary and urgent.
An additional incentive for the fastest possible implementation of the reform described here is the significant dominance of the advantages of the described here governmental actions and methods of governance over its disadvantages. So let us therefore list the most important of these advantages, as well as the probable disadvantages that can already be foreseen. Here they are:
(This entire post #376E would NOT fit into the memory of this blog - hence the rest of it will be continued below as post #376_3E)