I am a practical man. In my house I have two rules, that way no one has any excuse to forget them. They are:
1. Be truthful (Tell the truth)
2. Contribute (Do your job)
If my kids ask me for something I ask them if they have done their job, I check their reply is truthful. If it is, and they have, I consider their request.
There is however, a third rule, one that needs no enforcing and has never been verbalised. I am in charge. It seems to just work that way, without any deliberate influence. Like a natural order of sorts.
I work in a workshop. At the workshop there is the owner, then the manager, then the various section managers, then the workers in those sections. Correspondence, tasks, money, information flows mostly along that line. If it is flowing “uphill” it can be cut off and solved at any level, to avoid drowning the manager or owner in minor decisions that take up time from more important tasks. This is the way I have seen most effective businesses operate.
At work, if a sensible person wants something, a raise, leave in a busy period, a promotion, they ask. The person who they ask and those above them, if required in the decision, will be asking their own questions. Most of the questions, the interested person is in a position to affect the answer to, are along the lines of:
– How has this person contributed?
It seems like a continuation of the natural ordering of things.
Beyond small businesses, we have larger organisations. Let’s use an Army as an example. An Army has a clear order, usually called a chain of command. Leaders wear different symbols so that people can see at a glance who is in charge. Orders flow down the chain, opinions and requests flow up or across the chain and can get cut off or fufilled at the appropriate level. This process avoids drowning the higher-ups from having to make minor decisions when there are more important decisions to be made and actions to be taken.
If a person wants a promotion, or to be posted somewhere nice, leave or something like that, they either ask or are assessed as suitable. And then we have the same question asked about them. How have they contributed? Have they displayed an appropriate level of leadership and carried out their tasks to a high standard? If they have it will help to bring about the outcome they are looking for. Natural order strikes again.
Lets cut to democracy.
In this system, anyone who has achieved the significant milestone of reaching a certain age, they can have a say. Because making a request is based on being on this planet a certain number of days. Once a person has “made it”, they will be enlightened enough to make the right decision for themselves and those around them. they will be able to soberly and seriously consider the outcomes of their vote, and after much deliberation about the candidates and their policies, will cast the cast the appropriate vote. Everyone’s opinion is worth just as much as everyone else’s.
Totally fair, right?
And let’s not forget, balanced.
I mean, if you hang around long enough, you get a say.
I don’t consider the request of someone who has not done their job as highly as someone who has.
Nor does the business owner, or anyone in the workshop.
Nor does an officer or a person in the Army.
And our governments shouldn’t either.
There should be a way of measuring a person’s contributions, and if they are at a certain level, they can vote. That way, people who are actually invested in a nation’s future can have a say. The opinions of those who don’t contribute can be heard either through protest or some other method. This way they can attempt to convice those that can vote that their cause is worthwile.
Contributing should be something along the lines of meeting at least one of the following:
1. Paying at least $10,000 in tax a year for at least 5 years
2. Serving at least 5 years in the Defence Force
3. Being a mother of at least 2 children to a person in either category 1. or 2.
This way, only people who are actively contributing to the future of a nation can have a say. They should be in a position to more carefully consider their vote. They are invested in the outcome, because they are actually contributing. It will also have the added benefit of filtering out all parasitical people, who vote for things that benefit them, and give nothing back.