Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

[emilynghiem]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

 

[emilynghiem]

In response to Flopper and to two anarchists, one friend and teacher on Facebook calling to build a commune away from it all, and another on a website whose links are copied in a separate post below this:

I find that people are in different stages of spiritual and social development. So preaching or scolding people for where they are in life isn't always going to motivate them. It might work for those who need a solid kick in the behind. But some people are more like middle schoolers than college kids. Some need a teacher or mentor and just aren't ready to govern themselves independently.

Especially people who have been through abuse or trauma, or suffered incarceration in their families where there is a mix of dependence and rebellion and possibly regression. People respond to conflicts in different ways, like the Grief process and stages of anger, or denial and depression, that can last for 5-10 years or for generations, before they are ready for the next stage or step in changing themselves first, relationships next (where we all seem to be struggling now), and society as a result (where some people are already at this stage or have mastered it, but others are behind the curve or stuck at square one because of a mix of internal and external conflicts). I find it makes conflicts worse by judging people for where everyone is in this collective process; while the solution is to organize people so everyone can access the help they need to manage, regardless what state or stage each person or group is in.

Because I DO believe the purpose of society and humanity is to work toward SELF GOVT, I propose that we organize communities, parties and institutions to set up SUSTAINABLE CAMPUS towns and communities.

This model would ACCOMMODATE the fact we have DIFFERENT people at DIFFERENT stages, including total dependence on teachers or mentors. And some who are disabled and would rely on live-in assistants, for which I recommend student internships so that we can sustain "medical education" for low cost or free by on site training to offset the costs. If we are going to achieve universal health care "at cost" this will involve
(a) health care cooperatives owned and managed by the people directly (EX: www.medcoops.net www.medcoops.com nonprofit coop structure based on 1500 member-owners per chapter to achieve the numbers necessary to predict and reduce costs to get the maximum discounts on services at the minimum patient-to-provider ratio needed to sustain)
(b) converting or running criminal correction/detention programs as TEACHING HOSPITALS to diagnose, treat and cure causes of criminal disorder and mental illness to cut costs while providing medical education and training through enough mentors and interns, doctors and nurses, to localize care in each district and generate enough providers to serve the population at a ratio of 170:1 (compared with current US shortages of over 400 people to each physician)
(c) building systems of self government based on campus style democratic management (whether populations PREFER socialism, communism, anarchism, capitalism, green living, military or law enforcement, or even "all women" centers to help women and children in recovery from abuse) so that people mentor each other in supporting their own beliefs, religious or political, without conflict with other such groups that can manage their own "city states" democratically and/or congregate in larger pools similar to states in a union that are still sovereign.
EXAMPLES:
I. Sustainable Campus Community plan (passed into federal HUD laws in 1994) to reform public housing to be Democratically Managed by Residents through their own elected councils on site:
www.campusplan.org
II. Nonprofit that sets up sustainable centers/jobs/schools to combat slave labor trafficking and exploitation in poor regions:
www.paceuniversal.com
III. BORDER PROPOSAL to replicate above models to combat trafficking crimes targeting immigrant workers, and setting up military prisons and teaching hospitals to contain dangerous criminal for treatment rehab and restitution, while creating SAFE JOBS HOUSING and SERVICES for workers, families and citizens trained to build, manage and govern their own communities, resources and "campus towns" to stabilize the border and economy:
www.earnedamnesty.org
Again, 1500 is the minimum number found to support collective health care in a sustainable self-managed cooperative. As for "management" within a group, one person studying this said 150 is the most, but I'd say most groups aren't equipped to handle more than 10-20 or 40-50 (based on how well teachers respond to students, where "master teachers" can work with 40 or more students in one group, but even experienced teachers say 10 is the most they can ensure one-on-one attention and mentorship, and 20 can be managed but is better with a teaching assistant team teaching)
(d) EDUCATION AND TRAINING IN GROUP DYNAMICS
I would ESPECIALLY include teaching basic principles of democratic governance and natural law (whether people respond to Scriptural law, Constitutional law, or whatever language for the law "motivates" and "compels" them to protect each other's interests equally as a self-governing community), with a focus on conflict resolution, mediation to resolve issues of BELIEFS (so people can either work together or separate civilly to form their OWN groups when they outgrow and develop to later stages of autonomy, which tends to be the pattern as Populations grow, similar to children outgrowing their parents), and health care/restorative justice models that teach diagnosing and treating mental illness and criminal disorders that otherwise can prevent a person's ability to comply with either "laws, authority" or AGREEMENT with others if everyone is equally their own authority.
This level of treating mental and criminal illness as part of the SPIRITUAL process is MASTER LEVEL, and one of the reasons we are split up in society. Not everyone has access to or knowledge of the spiritual laws and process that can diagnose, treat and CURE severe medical and mental illnesses, so that's where people become "enslaved" politically and economically to prison systems and medical systems that exploit human sickness and social ills.

However, if master teachers and experts in this field AGREE to mentor others through campuses so more people can be SELF GOVERNING, we can BREAK the cycle of oppression by liberating and equalizing "knowledge of natural/universal laws" (UNIVERSAL LAWS on spiritual healing wellness and recovery that can change our failed prison systems into sustainable medical schools, teaching hospitals and health care to cover education and services for all; natural laws on democratic process and CONFLICT RESOLUTION so people can solve their own problems and not become dependent on "third party administrators" or political elite under corporate influences; laws/dynamics on cooperative economics and how to manage labor and credits so people can sustain their own self-governing coop communities without fear of getting bought our or hijacked by outside interests; laws/dynamics on property and land management including sustainable "green" development and renewable resources; and education and mentorship assistance "in general" in other areas of arts/sciences from media for communication to technology needed for cost effective sustainable living and development.)
SOURCES for further research and development in education to empower more people to become self-governing:
* www.ethics-commission.net Teaching and mentoring conflict resolution and managing relations and group dynamics based on democratic principles in the Bill of Rights, 14th Amendment on equal protections for all persons. (I might also add Civil Rights policies on "no discrimination by creed" since we seem to have an internal civil war going on within and between political parties fighting to dominate by majority instead of mentoring these warring groups to GOVERN THEMSELVES and FUND/FOLLOW their own internal policies and let others do the same)
* www.christianhealingmin.org
www.healingisyours.com
www.spiritual-healing.us
Resources on teaching the spiritual process of diagnosing, treating and curing physical, mental and even criminal illness as diseases with a root cause and a cure instead of punishing these or punishing taxpayers with debts and damages from failed mental health and criminal justice systems that merely create more crime, costs and poverty.
* other sources for teaching conflict resolution and healing to liberate people from past cycles of oppression
www.centerhealingracism.org
www.avpusa.org
https://cherishourchildren.org/ (formerly No More Victims founded by Marilyn Gambrell)

Whether people prefer or respond to a secular approach, political or religious, all such programs and what they offer should be accessible as an equal choice so everyone has opportunity and assistance to overcome patterns of dependence and oppression from the past and have personal support (such as internship and mentorship programs to replicate model programs proven to be effective and sustainable) to become independently self-governing without fear of further "enslavement."

We can set up campus communities to achieve this, and include people and groups "at all levels" of development, even if some are still "dependent on others."

 

[emilynghiem]

Original links by an advocate "Sivad" calling for anarchy.

====================================================
"The fundamental political question is why do people obey a government. The answer is that they tend to enslave themselves, to let themselves be governed by tyrants. Freedom from servitude comes not from violent action, but from the refusal to serve. Tyrants fall when the people withdraw their support.



Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives. All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death. He who thus domineers over you has only two eyes, only two hands, only one body, no more than is possessed by the least man among the infinite numbers dwelling in your cities; he has indeed nothing more than the power that you confer upon him to destroy you. Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you? The feet that trample down your cities, where does he get them if they are not your own? How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves? You sow your crops in order that he may ravage them, you install and furnish your homes to give him goods to pillage; you rear your daughters that he may gratify his lust; you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows — to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check.

From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free.

Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces.

The Discourse on Voluntary Servitude, or the Against-One (French: Discours de la servitude volontaire ou le Contr'un) is the most famous work of Étienne de La Boétie. The text was written probably around 1549 and published clandestinely in 1576 under the title of Le Contr'un ("The Against-One"). "One" here means 'single ruler'. "

 

[JWBooth]

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

The only thing we are getting close to is some overlap between Idiocracy and Brave New World with some of 1984’s Ingsoc thrown in.


Burn it all down.

 

[boedicca]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

Your utopian fantasy is a pit stop on the highway to Hell.

Pure Democracy always devolves into Mob Rule Reigns of Terror.

 

[emilynghiem]

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

The only thing we are getting close to is some overlap between Idiocracy and Brave New World with some of 1984’s Ingsoc thrown in.


Burn it all down.

Okay JWBooth thanks
That's one vote for the ANARCHIST saying NO GOVERNMENT.

Any votes for let anarchists, socialists, communists, capitalists,
liberals, greenies, conservatives and conservationists vote for
their OWN parties, run them like separate religious programs,
and keep their own management policies and terms of services and funding TO THEMSELVES.

Any votes for ISOCRACY by separating equal representation by PARTY.
And organizing input proportionally by party to consult with federal govt on how to
make these changes and reforms to accommodate and protect all interests and beliefs EQUALLY UNDER LAW.

Any takers or supporters on that approach?
Flopper Pogo anyone up for Constitutional reform
by recognizing democratic self-rule by parties as separate beliefs and political religious organizations?

 

[Pogo]

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

The only thing we are getting close to is some overlap between Idiocracy and Brave New World with some of 1984’s Ingsoc thrown in.


Burn it all down.

Okay JWBooth thanks
That's one vote for the ANARCHIST saying NO GOVERNMENT.

Any votes for let anarchists, socialists, communists, capitalists,
liberals, greenies, conservatives and conservationists vote for
their OWN parties, run them like separate religious programs,
and keep their own management policies and terms of services and funding TO THEMSELVES.

Any votes for ISOCRACY by separating equal representation by PARTY.
And organizing input proportionally by party to consult with federal govt on how to
make these changes and reforms to accommodate and protect all interests and beliefs EQUALLY UNDER LAW.

Any takers or supporters on that approach?
Flopper Pogo anyone up for Constitutional reform
by recognizing democratic self-rule by parties as separate beliefs and political religious organizations?

Well I just got here and thanks for the invite, but it will take me about a year to read through all this. However I can say that I'm not sure why you're so committed to the idea of political parties as the only way to go. Or so it seems.

And no, I don't believe we're headed for any kind of "civil war". That's the usual lunacy fringe, doing what they always do and always have done. And in the future when it fails to come to pass, they'll just keep doing it regardless, as they've always done before, because what they fuel on is self-delusion fantasy. And when you fuel on that, reality becomes irrelevant.

 

[emilynghiem]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

Your utopian fantasy is a pit stop on the highway to Hell.

Pure Democracy always devolves into Mob Rule Reigns of Terror.

Thanks boedicca
1. How is this Pure Democracy when it still allows the current representative democracy
and democratic republic to work and manage ALL THE OTHER GROUPS.

2. Only the groups that AGREE to govern themselves by "direct or pure democracy"
are affected by their own internal decision to use that model.

3. the other groups and parties can still choose and use their own system of preference.

Do you understand now, that this SEPARATES the people who want different forms
and lets them accept responsibility for their own consequences?

4. As for "mob rules reigns of terror" -- would you agree boedicca
that mob rule through the MEDIA is already devolving into "reigns of terror"
by fascist bullying back and forth. So this is already happening because
the representative system is leaving people out, so they are resorting to using media to voice
objections and express their own input that ISN'T BEING INCLUDED in the democratic process otherwise.

I'm saying let's ADD a system of INCLUDING all parties and their members,
so these voices CAN participate in the democratic process IN CONJUNCTION
with the current system we have.

We can use and EXPAND the ELECTORAL COLLEGE reps and districts
to MANAGE these diverse parties that otherwise are left out of the process.

boedicca NOTE: this is STILL representative and using the current system.
It's only direct if people can handle working in direct groups, which in my post
I recommend on very small local levels like groups of 10-20, while other
groups may be able to handle 40, 100 or more.

I ALSO recommend CONFLICT RESOLUTION training and assistance so
even small groups don't get into political messes, but either resolve
conflicts to collaborate or agree to SEPARATE into groups. So there
is no mass mob rule getting out of control. We manage that by organizing
in likeminded groups and keeping those from imposing on other groups.

Similar to large universities that can manage more students in an organized way.

Why not organize CAMPUS TOWNS where teachers, students, police, admin
all agree on agenda and work out their own programs, conflicts, funding
and plans for sustainable development.

Don't we have that ALREADY with the UT campus that crosses the border,
with UT Austin that is the size of a small town, with Rice University
that has democratically elected student govt.

How is this mob rule if we allow people to democratically elect
what they want to be representative and what they manage
and decide as local individuals and districts?

 

[boedicca]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

Your utopian fantasy is a pit stop on the highway to Hell.

Pure Democracy always devolves into Mob Rule Reigns of Terror.

Thanks boedicca
1. How is this Pure Democracy when it still allows the current representative democracy
and democratic republic to work and manage ALL THE OTHER GROUPS.

2. Only the groups that AGREE to govern themselves by "direct or pure democracy"
are affected by their own internal decision to use that model.

3. the other groups and parties can still choose and use their own system of preference.

Do you understand now, that this SEPARATES the people who want different forms
and lets them accept responsibility for their own consequences?

4. As for "mob rules reigns of terror" -- would you agree boedicca
that mob rule through the MEDIA is already devolving into "reigns of terror"
by fascist bullying back and forth. So this is already happening because
the representative system is leaving people out, so they are resorting to using media to voice
objections and express their own input that ISN'T BEING INCLUDED in the democratic process otherwise.

I'm saying let's ADD a system of INCLUDING all parties and their members,
so these voices CAN participate in the democratic process IN CONJUNCTION
with the current system we have.

We can use and EXPAND the ELECTORAL COLLEGE reps and districts
to MANAGE these diverse parties that otherwise are left out of the process.

boedicca NOTE: this is STILL representative and using the current system.
It's only direct if people can handle working in direct groups, which in my post
I recommend on very small local levels like groups of 10-20, while other
groups may be able to handle 40, 100 or more.

I ALSO recommend CONFLICT RESOLUTION training and assistance so
even small groups don't get into political messes, but either resolve
conflicts to collaborate or agree to SEPARATE into groups. So there
is no mass mob rule getting out of control. We manage that by organizing
in likeminded groups and keeping those from imposing on other groups.

Similar to large universities that can manage more students in an organized way.

Why not organize CAMPUS TOWNS where teachers, students, police, admin
all agree on agenda and work out their own programs, conflicts, funding
and plans for sustainable development.

Don't we have that ALREADY with the UT campus that crosses the border,
with UT Austin that is the size of a small town, with Rice University
that has democratically elected student govt.

How is this mob rule if we allow people to democratically elect
what they want to be representative and what they manage
and decide as local individuals and districts?

I'll refer you to Tocqueville and ask you to reflect on the identity politics - victim ideology embedded in your proposals. They won't work.

 

[emilynghiem]

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

The only thing we are getting close to is some overlap between Idiocracy and Brave New World with some of 1984’s Ingsoc thrown in.


Burn it all down.

Okay JWBooth thanks
That's one vote for the ANARCHIST saying NO GOVERNMENT.

Any votes for let anarchists, socialists, communists, capitalists,
liberals, greenies, conservatives and conservationists vote for
their OWN parties, run them like separate religious programs,
and keep their own management policies and terms of services and funding TO THEMSELVES.

Any votes for ISOCRACY by separating equal representation by PARTY.
And organizing input proportionally by party to consult with federal govt on how to
make these changes and reforms to accommodate and protect all interests and beliefs EQUALLY UNDER LAW.

Any takers or supporters on that approach?
Flopper Pogo anyone up for Constitutional reform
by recognizing democratic self-rule by parties as separate beliefs and political religious organizations?

Well I just got here and thanks for the invite, but it will take me about a year to read through all this. However I can say that I'm not sure why you're so committed to the idea of political parties as the only way to go. Or so it seems.

And no, I don't believe we're headed for any kind of "civil war". That's the usual lunacy fringe, doing what they always do and always have done.

Thanks Pogo I'm saying to preserve that as a CHOICE for people
who insist on govt or depend on party. That way, people like my progressive
friends who believe in govt protecting health care access for all can still
create the stability and semblance of that, through party support for it,
without imposing on people of other parties against govt managed health care.

And we can still keep medicare programs where all people and parties agree.
It's just a shortcut for people who still use parties to organize LARGE GROUPS
under one agreed policy, instead of trying to manage all those members individually.
They can get collective health care set up faster as a GROUP by going through their party, if they prefer.

 

[emilynghiem]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

Your utopian fantasy is a pit stop on the highway to Hell.

Pure Democracy always devolves into Mob Rule Reigns of Terror.

Thanks boedicca
1. How is this Pure Democracy when it still allows the current representative democracy
and democratic republic to work and manage ALL THE OTHER GROUPS.

2. Only the groups that AGREE to govern themselves by "direct or pure democracy"
are affected by their own internal decision to use that model.

3. the other groups and parties can still choose and use their own system of preference.

Do you understand now, that this SEPARATES the people who want different forms
and lets them accept responsibility for their own consequences?

4. As for "mob rules reigns of terror" -- would you agree boedicca
that mob rule through the MEDIA is already devolving into "reigns of terror"
by fascist bullying back and forth. So this is already happening because
the representative system is leaving people out, so they are resorting to using media to voice
objections and express their own input that ISN'T BEING INCLUDED in the democratic process otherwise.

I'm saying let's ADD a system of INCLUDING all parties and their members,
so these voices CAN participate in the democratic process IN CONJUNCTION
with the current system we have.

We can use and EXPAND the ELECTORAL COLLEGE reps and districts
to MANAGE these diverse parties that otherwise are left out of the process.

boedicca NOTE: this is STILL representative and using the current system.
It's only direct if people can handle working in direct groups, which in my post
I recommend on very small local levels like groups of 10-20, while other
groups may be able to handle 40, 100 or more.

I ALSO recommend CONFLICT RESOLUTION training and assistance so
even small groups don't get into political messes, but either resolve
conflicts to collaborate or agree to SEPARATE into groups. So there
is no mass mob rule getting out of control. We manage that by organizing
in likeminded groups and keeping those from imposing on other groups.

Similar to large universities that can manage more students in an organized way.

Why not organize CAMPUS TOWNS where teachers, students, police, admin
all agree on agenda and work out their own programs, conflicts, funding
and plans for sustainable development.

Don't we have that ALREADY with the UT campus that crosses the border,
with UT Austin that is the size of a small town, with Rice University
that has democratically elected student govt.

How is this mob rule if we allow people to democratically elect
what they want to be representative and what they manage
and decide as local individuals and districts?

I'll refer you to Tocqueville and ask you to reflect on the identity politics - victim ideology embedded in your proposals. They won't work.

Dear boedicca and Pogo
Yes and no. While I AGREE with you against victim and identity politics,
it's still part of the stages people go through and can't be forced or rushed to change.

The BEST way I know to stop the victim/identity politics is to
HOLD THEM TO THEIR OWN POLICIES. Make them pay for the programs
they support, and see where that leads.

BTW It doesn't HAVE to be embedded.
People can choose whatever way they want.

It's if they KEEP CHOOSING this system, I say LET THEM HAVE IT.

If they want to choose "identity politics" FOR THEMSELVES that's THEIR BELIEF.
Let THEM read your Tocqueville all they want.
If they CHOOSE to change and use a different system, they'll have that choice as well!

Until they experience THE CONSEQUENCES for themselves, it's not the same.

Nothing wrong with OFFERING them that choice.

Question boedicca GIVEN that SOME people are stuck in victim/identity mode,
do you believe "Sivad"'s approach is better, of just YELLING and BARKING
at people to get over their own enslavement?

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

If so, I guess I count your input as the SECOND vote for the ANARCHIST approach.

Are you sure this works better for EVERYONE?
Does it work for YOU when people tell YOU to GIVE UP YOUR BELIEFS
and START OVER WITH NO GOVERNMENT.

Are you calling for something in between the two extremes
(if you think mine is coddling too much in allowing certain groups
of people to keep their identity/victim politics if that's where they are right now)

What do you suggest to get us from where we are NOW
to where we COULD or SHOULD be or NEED to be.

What would you change or suggest boedicca or keep using the same system without changing anything?
Thanks!

 

[boedicca]

In continuing a discussion with Flopper in another thread on political division, here is my post and list compiling model solutions that can guide us toward Democratic Self-Government. I believe we are heading there, as part of natural spiritual and social development.

The NEXT POST below was shared with someone calling for anarchy, and even taking a scolding to people who insisted on clinging to systems that were clearly enslaving whole populations politically and economically.

So it's written from the viewpoint of accepting people in different stages of development instead of judging or blaming. And I tried to soften the language where it's more about teaching DYNAMICS of group management and cooperative economics/politics instead of coming across as "legislating more outside laws and authority"

Please read through the next two posts, one from me and the other the original post from an anarchist perspective.

Do you believe we are close enough where we COULD replicate sustainable cooperative models,
and build campus towns or city states to be SELF GOVERNING. From where we are TODAY with political infighting?

Do you believe we aren't close enough, and will experience MORE CIVIL WARS before people can embrace solutions and work together to build them, even where that means SEPARATING by party and letting each govern their own.

Do you prefer the all out call for anarchy and everyone give up and do it yourself, stop whining stop bullying and pushing the same systems that aren't working.

Or do you prefer that we USE the current party system to organize mass reform by GROUPS.

Thank you. I hope this helps open up new angles and take new avenues to solve political problems we're facing within parties and between parties at war for control over the narrative in the media.

Your utopian fantasy is a pit stop on the highway to Hell.

Pure Democracy always devolves into Mob Rule Reigns of Terror.

Thanks boedicca
1. How is this Pure Democracy when it still allows the current representative democracy
and democratic republic to work and manage ALL THE OTHER GROUPS.

2. Only the groups that AGREE to govern themselves by "direct or pure democracy"
are affected by their own internal decision to use that model.

3. the other groups and parties can still choose and use their own system of preference.

Do you understand now, that this SEPARATES the people who want different forms
and lets them accept responsibility for their own consequences?

4. As for "mob rules reigns of terror" -- would you agree boedicca
that mob rule through the MEDIA is already devolving into "reigns of terror"
by fascist bullying back and forth. So this is already happening because
the representative system is leaving people out, so they are resorting to using media to voice
objections and express their own input that ISN'T BEING INCLUDED in the democratic process otherwise.

I'm saying let's ADD a system of INCLUDING all parties and their members,
so these voices CAN participate in the democratic process IN CONJUNCTION
with the current system we have.

We can use and EXPAND the ELECTORAL COLLEGE reps and districts
to MANAGE these diverse parties that otherwise are left out of the process.

boedicca NOTE: this is STILL representative and using the current system.
It's only direct if people can handle working in direct groups, which in my post
I recommend on very small local levels like groups of 10-20, while other
groups may be able to handle 40, 100 or more.

I ALSO recommend CONFLICT RESOLUTION training and assistance so
even small groups don't get into political messes, but either resolve
conflicts to collaborate or agree to SEPARATE into groups. So there
is no mass mob rule getting out of control. We manage that by organizing
in likeminded groups and keeping those from imposing on other groups.

Similar to large universities that can manage more students in an organized way.

Why not organize CAMPUS TOWNS where teachers, students, police, admin
all agree on agenda and work out their own programs, conflicts, funding
and plans for sustainable development.

Don't we have that ALREADY with the UT campus that crosses the border,
with UT Austin that is the size of a small town, with Rice University
that has democratically elected student govt.

How is this mob rule if we allow people to democratically elect
what they want to be representative and what they manage
and decide as local individuals and districts?

I'll refer you to Tocqueville and ask you to reflect on the identity politics - victim ideology embedded in your proposals. They won't work.

Dear boedicca and Pogo
Yes and no. While I AGREE with you against victim and identity politics,
it's still part of the stages people go through and can't be forced or rushed to change.

The BEST way I know to stop the victim/identity politics is to
HOLD THEM TO THEIR OWN POLICIES. Make them pay for the programs
they support, and see where that leads.

BTW It doesn't HAVE to be embedded.
People can choose whatever way they want.

It's if they KEEP CHOOSING this system, I say LET THEM HAVE IT.

If they want to choose "identity politics" FOR THEMSELVES that's THEIR BELIEF.
Let THEM read your Tocqueville all they want.
If they CHOOSE to change and use a different system, they'll have that choice as well!

Until they experience THE CONSEQUENCES for themselves, it's not the same.

Nothing wrong with OFFERING them that choice.

Question boedicca GIVEN that SOME people are stuck in victim/identity mode,
do you believe "Sivad"'s approach is better, of just YELLING and BARKING
at people to get over their own enslavement?

Democratic Self-Government: Are we heading there or not even close?

If so, I guess I count your input as the SECOND vote for the ANARCHIST approach.

Are you sure this works better for EVERYONE?
Does it work for YOU when people tell YOU to GIVE UP YOUR BELIEFS
and START OVER WITH NO GOVERNMENT.

Are you calling for something in between the two extremes
(if you think mine is coddling too much in allowing certain groups
of people to keep their identity/victim politics if that's where they are right now)

What do you suggest to get us from where we are NOW
to where we COULD or SHOULD be or NEED to be.

What would you change or suggest boedicca or keep using the same system without changing anything?
Thanks!

Letting them have their own systems is completely unrealistic unless we want to break the country into Apartheid zones.

As for what we should do: apply the Constitution as written.

 

[JWBooth]

 

[JWBooth]

 

[emilynghiem]

View attachment 263016

JWBooth
I'm saying if we organize by likeminded groups, then by organizing resources better as in a CAMPUS with separate DEPTS and CLASS LEVELS, we can TEACH and TRAIN people to TAKE STEPS toward independent self-reliance.

When parents mentor and help their own children,
don't they start off with total dependent relationships and grow through
adolescence to adulthood?

Why don't we apply this same step by step approach, and apply it toward
cultural groups, communities and countries.

Just because ALL people start off like babies totally dependent on parents
and UNABLE to manage themselves, doesn't mean we are supposed to stay that way.

If children are expected to grow up and become self-sufficient,
what about communities learning to govern themselves,
Given the right support to finish going through all the stages of development it takes.

We don't expect children to raise themselves either!

 

[jwoodie]

There is only one economic system that recognizes human traits and harnesses them into a positive direction: Capitalism. All the rest eventually collapse when the producers in a society are no longer rewarded for their efforts.

 

[JWBooth]

Letting them have their own systems is completely unrealistic unless we want to break the country into Apartheid zones.

As for what we should do: apply the Constitution as written.

 

[emilynghiem]

View attachment 263017

Yes JWBooth and also boedicca

1. So if taxpayers vote for party leaders, why not hold them responsible financially for paying
for the policies their leaders and parties vote in?

Isn't reverse psychology and giving them what they ask
a way to compel people to take responsibility for their own decisions?

2. boedicca
RE: As for what we should do: apply the Constitution as written.

Are you okay with applying the Constitution "as written" where religious freedom and no discrimination by creed
APPLIES TO POLITICAL PARTIES AS POLITICAL RELIGIONS TO BE TREATED AS ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS ORGANIZATION

If so, we can use the Constitution as written.

If not, do we need a Constitutional convention, Amendment, or federal legislation clarifying limits to prevent Parties from imposing their beliefs through govt and causing DISPARITY IN REPRESENTATION THAT DISCRIMINATES BY CREED.

If Govt Establishing or Discriminating by CREED is ALREADY against the Constitution,
why aren't we ENFORCING it? Do we need a CLARIFICATION this applies to political beliefs?

3. SEE also Amendments 5 and 14 that are ALREADY in the Constitution:
RE: NOT depriving Persons of LIBERTY without due process of law

Why isn't THIS being enforced boedicca if it's already in the Constitution TWICE!!!

(My answer boedicca we aren't teaching and training people how to follow and
enforce this. that's why I'm saying we should set up mentorship programs to educate people on the laws and help communities to enforce democratic principles and process. that's what my thread is about, how to set up campus style programs and districts so people can ACCESS education and mentorship and learn by EXPERIENCE how to manage and govern themselves. this isn't about forced apartheid but mass organization by working LOCALLY in cooperative fashion, following models already proven to be effective and sustainable, not chaotic.)​

 

[emilynghiem]

Letting them have their own systems is completely unrealistic unless we want to break the country into Apartheid zones.

As for what we should do: apply the Constitution as written.

View attachment 263018

Yes and no JWBooth
RE:

It ALREADY INCLUDES democratic process for revising and reforming representation systems WITHIN it. So this isn't against the Constitution, and not outside the power of the people either, who retain authority of govt in the first place.

NOTE: the original Constitution was ALREADY altered from its previous checks and balances including
1. Senators appointed by State instead of democratically elected
2. Not allowing President and VP to come from separate parties which removed another check

Current objections that may alter the
3. system of Electoral College voting and representation influenced unequally by PARTY

I believe WE CAN APPLY the Constitutional system of democratic process and reform
back to itself.

This is not against the Constitution, and still allows reforms to correct
problems with people of different beliefs and parties sharing equal protection and representation for all citizens regardless.

The Constitution NEVER took the power away from people to govern themselves locally. It just provides the language and process by which people can fulfill and maintain democratic self-government. That reform and refinement process isn't against the Constitution or outside it, but works with it.

 

[emilynghiem]

There is only one economic system that recognizes human traits and harnesses them into a positive direction: Capitalism. All the rest eventually collapse when the producers in a society are no longer rewarded for their efforts.

the best thing about free enterprise or free market, jwoodie
it respects free will or free choice which is necessary for humans to operate.

so if people want to experiment and choose more socialistic or communistic systems,
they can do so under a free market system.

by separating the groups to take responsibility for their own costs and consequences,
they still have freedom to learn by experience, which is the best teacher.