Time has had many gods. The unrelenting dimension ruling our lives and measuring our values has had many demi-godly offspring. One of those is memory.
What if our ideas have a memory? What if they could tell us of the past without lapse in judgment, care or cause for blame? If they speak to us of how the victorious wrote themselves into our history and how they manipulated, disapproved, and abused duplicitously. Some believed them gods. In psychology, and to some academics, ideas have always been gods. The movement of philosophy out of theology, and psychology emerging out of the struggles of disciplined engineering and medicine, show that our memories are not legitimate to secure our minds in time. What we can observe is human behaviour and how ideas have changed the way we act.
At every level and in every sort of Government lies the unobserved history of formations of governments throughout time. We yet call some Federal Commonwealth nations Constitutional Monarchy. But our history is that of war and the use of force. The only power any Government has or can possess is the use of force.
Where have we positioned ourselves most often? Historically, out of perceived necessity, but for a few gasping attempts at life, it has been in the state of control, perhaps some safety, and not sustaining liberty and freedom. You’ve heard, “To the victor goes the spoils” this is inaccurate “To the victor belong the spoils”; this is a distinction with a difference. Almost every Government has stood in opposition to liberty. They have all burned the books, murdered their citizens, enslaved them, raped their persons and their resources. If you do not see people, you speak truths which can destroy them; often you’ll say things that you never would to another human face; to see the sweat and the tears; to crumple it in that hurt way. If you do not understand how other people live, what they need, what they desire, it is easy to dismiss them. How much removal is required before you might engage in an industry which has the potential to ensure that no other creative productions exist? So long as you hold the golden parachute, it hasn’t been necessary to answer that question.
Every victory of journalism, free expression, pluralism, has come at the cost of Government power and a lessening of violent force. We live now in a continuous Gutenberg Revision, the most peaceful times ever in human history. Ever so gently, across that history as a social species, our capacity for warfare has turned less and less violent as our vision of the other has become more precise. The wars we wage are now usually wars of ideas. If someone commits an assassination of a head of state, we are aware of our previous century. We’re too integrated by technology to suggest violence of that scale. Yet we still cling to the idea that someone else should know better. We the people take no personal responsibility in our law or execution of political policy. We have no purchase and instead must sell our voices to representatives.
Across time, it’s clear, we did not understand each other, and we could only just barely imagine ourselves fixed in our cultures and societies. Pure alienation is being unable to see yourself as a part of your community or culture; it has no place in its story to narrate yourself. That barrier is eroding over tens of thousands of years. But then which is best – how should we live? Must we dispense with all limitations? We must be free to discover that for ourselves and unfettered when we speak in our appraisal of what is better or worse. The only method which has shown any capacity to move beyond warfare is negotiation. Negotiation and war were inseparable for long centuries, with war taking precedence, but have now been rebalanced by our global connectivity; shoving violence to the back of our minds as a last resort. It was the ability to recognize and imagine the other as an extension and connexion to ourselves, being able to trade and speak and be heard. From a chorus’ of expression, we wrote collections of stories detailing how best to live. Stories narrated by generations from every culture due to our capacity to democratize our art and our knowledge. It persuaded us of our ability to be free. We must not become complacent about these freedoms in our age of democratized information.
Therefore, the relationship between a government and its people must always err on the side of liberty, as John Stuart Mill wrote. Yet, every aspect which the Government controls operates on its ability to use force. Without the voice of the population to sway their decisions in real-time, they rely upon representatives and outdated election cycles. They will be able to act in the supposed interests of others and then duplicitously in their self-interest. No-one suspects that any of this needs to be updated because it has been the most successful and least lethal game which one can play in politics.
How to Collapse a Government
If you’re considering what it will take to cause chaos and death, violence against people, don’t look further than the practice of representation and election in our Governments. If you’re considering what it will take to arrest a paltry percentage of those who commit violence and crime do not look further than the practice of representation and election in our Governments. All democratic governments attempt to solve the problems of vast resource distribution and the delicate balance of power by reviewing and petitioning the will of the people. Although, legally, corporations are themselves considered people. However, in our representative systems, the will of the people is an afterthought. Not by design, those who crafted the long-form congressional style of our public forums did not neglect the law. They, comprised of some of the most daring genius’ from which you could devise, construct and guide nations, were the builders. Any solution will have unintended consequences presenting themselves to the enlightened as an opaque piece of art not yet complete and abandoned by her author.
Who can Represent you?
When any Representative system attempts to gauge the will of the people, it must negate up to half of the voices of those people. Even more than that number, if you consider how many political bodies operate, is excluded from any policy decision or even the necessary functions of argument and debate. This negation happens at a local level, merely. This number can increase to a massive 80% of those voices discarded in favour of those who won a popular vote Nationally. This ancient and rigid system cannot be called democratic in the age of technology. These new generations know and understand what instant feedback means. iGen (Generation Z, <1995) did not grow-up having to load Windows from DOS. Millennials, GenX, and Boomers certainly, have maintained a mélange of distrust and expectation concerning their governance. Millennials and iGen abhor theirs, while also affecting not to care at all how they govern. That is how we have ghosts, shadows, of representation leaning over the future earnings of all those mentioned. Adding this to the unborn and their futures, sucking up resources via Stock Trades, fiscal irresponsibility, unfunded liability and outright lies to the public about our everyday purse and causes. These are not faults of those in power. These are the evidence of another idea rooted in time and memory: Self-Interest.
Self-Interest is married to everything we do; no one considers anyone else before themselves when it comes to the most pertinent fact of our survival. It must colour every action or decision and every utterance. What is understood intuitively by all people are the desires we all have for ourselves. That is also why those faithful to ambition don’t levy any insult or argument against power itself. However, neither do others, who have reason; this is the most prosperous style of Government with the most growth in literacy and variety of art and technological advancement. But what is the operation of self-interest in Government? Usually, it is money and power. Those who attempt advancement themselves for honest Government, or the will of the people, are all quickly stifled and ousted by those who would prefer more money. Would you prefer more cash? We know the answer. To many of those mentioned previously in generational cohorts, it appears as if everyone is playing a rigged game of dice. The dice are weighted to always show the same pips depending on whose turn it may be. We all observe this, and we know it’s unfair to some, but we all want a turn at the toss. Its usually framed as a fault in the public servants themselves. These are our electorate. As George Carlin said before the internet,”[…]So, maybe, maybe, maybe, it’s not the politicians who suck. Maybe something else sucks around here… like, the public. Yeah, the public sucks. There’s a nice campaign slogan for somebody: ‘The Public Sucks. F*ck Hope.'” Everyone is self-interested, and everyone will make deals which benefit themselves at the cost of a supposed obligation which is impossible to fulfil. To attempt to represent others is hypocritical. There are no unstained, self-less, representatives, only more or less degraded options.
Representation on your behalf is impossible.
These are not servants to the public. They whirl about rootless words until you come to understand they are corporate managers, financial managers, financial speculators or service operators and providers. They are business, law and economics graduates. Every single one has altered their position in life and policy upon the whims of supposed Capitalism. Yet, if you were to mention Entrepreneurial Capitalist endeavours and risks, they would be mortified. They are the visionaries and bulwark of an economic system which they reject.
When you have no option but to be accountable for your actions, you must learn from them immediately, and you must encounter consequence. When you sell your vote in favour of a representative, there is no transfer of real responsibility and no effect to the voter. For this reason, the electorate no longer cares, and adults don’t bother learning anything about Government until they make enough money to notice their taxation.
The marriage of technology and Government.
Why haven’t you heard of this idea except derisively? A method for the Government to spy on her people or control their information, maybe you’ve heard that idea. Perhaps you’ve listened to a mocking suggestion of the impossibility of direct democracy? Why haven’t any of our elites or our representatives suggested that we use technology to increase representation itself rather than expand government services? No one has suggested it that currently holds or esteems power. You won’t hear it from them. The reason for that is apparent: To expand representation makes representatives redundant, you’d make them unnecessary if you were to have your voice. You have your voice anyway, in almost every avenue of thought, except for in your Government. Do you need to ask your representative at the bank? At the gas company? To post a tweet or gain access to almost any part of the market? They insult you: The ways of Government are too far beyond the minds of the population such that they should not be involved lest they muck about in ignorance. The truth is this: They do not want you to have a voice; they don’t want you to understand the law or to be able to read the policy. They like their jobs, their friends in power, their stock options, and their access to resources. They don’t want to make a sacrifice in the name of more excellent democratic representation.
What we have is a sluggish public disinterested, repulsed, by their governments, who’re busy trading stocks during a pandemic, making it impossible to retain a debt-driven economy. While instructing us to feel blessed and happy to be able to afford more debt for our future educations, housing, and lives, they experience no uncertainty or insecurities. If we made every voice heard and enforced a supermajority (66%+ of the vote or the vote does not pass by default), we would change the face of Government. We would not eradicate the Government. We would expand its voice, that being our voice, our will while curtailing its mistakes in spending and its farcical representation.
A quorum of 66%+ does away with the foolish idea, 50%+1, which is a popularity contest, singly focused on who can spend more money during an election cycle. There would be no need for first-past-the-post methods anywhere or an electoral college. If you abstain from a vote, erring on the side of liberty (fewer laws and more freedom) your vote counts as No. Simple ideas are not difficult to imagine. It’s not difficult to imagine a future where all voices that can directly affect them are listened to and respected in their Government.
How much of the public purse would be unburdened? How many problems which could be solved now easily by proper policy could be expedited rather than waiting for Congress to shuffle its way into a session? It’s impossible to calculate, but it is not impossible to imagine how much change could be made for the better of our societies if every voice had access.
All we require is time and our memory. If we are honest and our speech is unburdened we can be free. Some ideas are better than others.