expose What follows is roughly vote on ideas, not people , choose where to direct our vote, not on someone else's hands only and have a say in decision making. REACTION
[...] The issue is to organize the implementation of these new techniques so that those pioneers at the forefront of social evolution can not (or want) to be leaders, but doers. Instead of running the system as a whole, do things to improve specific characteristics s it. Therefore, to avoid stagnation of ideas on a social level, to avoid a system in place, there can be no government as we know, all individuals govern or guide the society through their contributions to art and culture .
This creates an emerging society. Following the natural course of technology, communication between human beings is given up to a global interconnection, so that each individual knows perfectly still and that their contribution will help yourself, your family and everyone else and that the contributions from the world follow the same path, n or interrupted by a government that would be unnecessary in this historical context. Since there is no all-encompassing power, in this system the only constant is change. The cycle of 'stagnation-revolution-stagnation', with its struggle between old and new ideas, just stops working and is naturally replaced by another paradigm: social developments in an emerging society. "
Society is an evolving system. Adapting new developments and techniques we can create new systems of organization to represent us. We can create a political party that really is the people and where you know you're not throwing your vote. Internet is the tool.
The initial idea is simple, buy a politician is easy, but buying into a community is more difficult. What arises here is a political community assemblies, horizontal hierarchy, open and participatory , a form of modern assembly via the Internet.
may not be a perfect system, as everything must go correcting and adapting, but there is the interesting thing that we can be doing together, that makes all the bases, all must participate to make the system work. I'm not a politician nor do I have many computer skills, just raised the idea and I need that if people want to collaborate to develop through constructive criticism and organization to be laying the groundwork.
We need to share ideas, we must organize and we have the technology.
the ekklesia (Popular Assembly)
The party would be hosted on a website where registered users have access, anyone can register. They may propose, discuss and participate in referendums. Function as a meeting via the Internet. Voting on the IDEAS, not people.
Once registered you can comment and discuss, but you can not vote until you prove to be a relatively active user and valued in the community. That is, you have a kind of "karma" (prestige), when you leave a comment in a debate people can appreciate it, positive feedback does increase your karma. When you have a certain karma you can vote on the proposals in referendums because you have proven to be a participatory and relatively valued user community. Would be somewhat similar to the operation of the community "menéame , but also voting phase will add a referendum.
The system must be improved among all, anyone can propose reforms that will REFERENDUM carried. The proposals must pass several stages before being submitted to vote: 1 .- Approach
2 .- 3 .- Discussion groups
main ideas Election Vote
4 .-
STRUCTURE
community be divided into three main sections as if it were a newspaper: "Local", "National" and "International." In turn, these sections will be divided by themes: culture, budgets, infrastructure etc ... to make it more accessible, if you're interested in a particular subject or you are an expert, you can go to that particular section. Within each theme may be a number indeterminate debates where the user can read, participate in or appreciate the comments. These are presented in the order you want the user to avoid preferences, at random, by date, by rating ...
Discussions will be several steps up to the last: the REFERENDUM. I show up a graphic example of the structure.
I'll put practical example:
A community member is Tired of the bottle you have is their neighborhood and that young people make noise on public streets late at night. The procedure is as follows: 1 .-
would go to "policy local "and raise the problem of the bottle to the community. After he valued approach a certain number of users enter on the cover. may be binding or advisory.
2 .- open a discussion period where users may think, argue, or begin to propose solutions. All registered users may participate in this phase. will assess the comments (so far would be very similar to the page of "Digg").
3 .- Once public debate appear (for example) 3 main streams of thought, as most valued by the community (could be 4, 6 or more). In This phase will be to improve, modify or enhance each alternative separately, creating in this case 3 lines of debate to take them to vote. Continuing the example above:
a) User A proposed ban on certain roads bottle to ensure the safety of children and the rest of the neighbors. Drinking is prohibited on public streets after some time.
b) User B aims to create a zone for the bottle in a concrete park in the city (botellódromo) with glass recycling crews and ambulances to serve youth.
c) Finally, the user C intends to make a sound insulation works on the windows of the neighbors affected only in cases where noise exceeds X decibels. * The estimated initial budget is € *. XXXX
4 .- Phase REFERENDUM. 3 information packs are made for each of the three proposals made. Information packets will show the arguments and the planned measures. * Important: Before voting be mandatory viewing (you can not vote without being properly informed of all proposals on the subject.) There will be a fourth option, if you do not agree with any of the above proposals will have the opportunity to vote blank and return to the stage of discussion in case it gets a majority.
5 .- The last phase will take the proposal to the competent body. Proposals may be binding or advisory. REPRESENTATIVES
The party will need some people to physically represent the party in parliament if he is elected. These are elected by the community and speak on behalf of the community, but in no case have the power of decision. Will simply be the voice of the community in the competent body. PROBLEMS TO BE SOLVED
Possible problems I found and I hope that can be solved by all the time to lay the groundwork:
-limited Internet access for many people. Example of an elderly or a homeless
Danger of proposals are not contrasted with actual data.
-Aupamiento of demagoguery on the grounds.
-would be impossible to listen to all proposals.
-Like current media groups and power would be better able to manipulate the masses in pursuit of a proposal.
-emergence of conflicting laws, absurd, or unjust, the product of specific times of euphoria, anger, rage, etc.
-laws against the minority community away
ADVANTAGES
One of the great advantages I find in this system is that now do not really know how you vote, do not have access to what happens backstage behind a political speech. Vote for a party of this kind, it would be only one vote, would open the possibility of having many more votes. If you only got one seat, it would be open to anyone. Anyone could have access to that seat and discuss each proposal individually, all have voice. The people would fall directly in the parliamentary debate.
Of course, everything would have to make a disinterested and have no advertising. If you're not interested, do not vote. As easy as that. It would be a solution to many of the problems we face daily. I know the idea is very green, I insist that I am not political, so I accept all constructive criticism and ideas to be developed accordingly. If we spread the word by the people not only be a pirate party, pirate party is open to many more fields.
«(...) the primary value of collective intelligence is not to help a group in the handling or passing another, but to allow democratic systems and self-organized to respond creatively to changing conditions to the around. The major purpose of collective intelligence is to access the wisdom of all for the good of all. " -Tom Atlee
BACKGROUND AND INFLUENCES
http://www.meneame.net/ : Community where users upload and vote news and generated interesting debates in some news thanks to the feedback rating system
http://es. ideas4all.com /? gclid = CL7P7O3Go6YCFUIKfAodoRWtjw : Community where users upload and vote on ideas.
Some texts are extracted from: http://www.ciudadanosmundo.com/2010/10/la-evolucion-social-en-una-sociedad. html
Related article: http://articxiongmao.blogspot.com/2009/03/una-democracia-democratica.html
I was also interested in an idea that I just found a user ideas4all:
"(...) The proposal is to create a virtual country in a web page, its provinces, boroughs, municipalities, income, expenses, budgets, laws, etc.
Users of the website (virtual country's citizens) can vote for anything that concerns them directly or indirectly, which in a real country would be submitted to congress, senate, provincial boards, etc. Instead, the country was put to a referendum virtual mail and web users could give their vote.
would be a reasonable time for each user to give his vote, but anyone may also delegate his vote to another person or organization (political party), not having to spend all day pending changes in legislation. To avoid conflicts, you first have a deadline for political parties, and another for individual users. The parties may also have computers in their offices and invite people to vote (with privacy to do so.) (...)"
More things I found: http://democracia20.blogspot.com/2008/10/aferrados-convicciones-polticas-si-y.html
"My proposal is follows: That any person oner can prop and vote online for all important measures. Since not everyone has time or can stay informed, whoever may designate a representative who will represent you if you do not vote the same. This delegate will be as current members, with the difference that can be changed when desired, can be anyone, and will not require a minimum number of represented to exercise their role. If five people delegate in their vote worth five times. If you are hundred percent worth . "
TIME CHANGE
The political system currently used by most democratic countries is far from reality, is outdated. You vote for candidates based on who is more handsome, who smiles more for the camera or just because we put them up in the soup. We vote for parties that know the most of their political agenda, and often not fulfilled what we promised ... "I've become a confindir in my opinion ... to wait another four years ...".
"Power tends to corrupt.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely"
"History of humanity is essentially a history of ideas. "HG Wells
- Article 23 of the English Constitution:
" Citizens have the right to participate in public affairs, directly or through representatives freely elected in periodic universal suffrage. "
-Article 6:
" Political parties express political pluralism, they contribute to the formation and expression of popular will and are an essential instrument for political participation. Their creation and the exercise of its activities are free in respect for the Constitution and the Law The internal structure and functioning must be democratic. "
People who actually have ideas to improve society is not involved in politics" ... politics is too corrupt ...", little by little, we feel that our voice is increasingly minimized in the bottom of a well, our ideas and we are not stuck into account when making important decisions. I'm not political, not interest me so, but I would like contribute to improving the world. Is it that politicians are really ready to fix something? We demonstrate daily that do not. The politicians are trying to preserve what we already have, do not address improved. Do you think that you pick on politicians, and politicians are elected for you?. I have one thing clear. I do not feel represented. All look alike.
The corruption of the current policy has reached a breaking point when the markets are taking control of democracy. We do not live in a participatory democracy. Have made the idea of \u200b\u200bmodern democracy to hide the real domain of large enterprises. We do go every four years to the polls to feed that fantasy. It's time to wake up and talk.
For any questions, feedback or brainstorming, leave a comment or send an email:
0 comments:
Post a Comment