Real Solutions [1.3]

[CHRISTINA]

Solutions, Part 1: Why standing government must be replaced by coalescent government

http://redefininggod.com/2015/07/solutions-part-1-why-standing-gove...

Solutions, Part 2: The main problem with government is hierarchy
Solutions, Part 3: Behold the Insanity of Current Elections and Imagine Something New
Solutions, Part 4: The only way to set up a democracy that works

http://redefininggod.com/real-solutions/

[CHRISTINA]

a repost: The Solution to the New World Order is OUR World Order

• Posted by CHRISTINA on April 2, 2018

[CHRISTINA]

Solutions, Part 2: The main problem with government is hierarchy
He who places the person on top…

…controls all that is below.
When pondering a properly functioning government “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” it’s hard to imagine a more ill-suited organizational structure than a hierarchy…
A hierarchy, by its very nature, is structured for the rule of the few over the many, not the rule of the many over themselves. As such, it is utterly antithetical to the democratic ideal.
Let’s consider a few reasons why this is so:
1) Since the person atop a hierarchy exercises authority over all those below, a hierarchical government is easily corrupted. This predisposition towards corruptibility is so strong, in fact, that corruption is inevitable (so it is no accident that this structure was used in the design of our fake democracies). A corrupting force need only place their agent at the top of the organization to completely capture it. And should they fail to achieve that, the corruptors need only bribe, blackmail, or intimidate the person at the top to do their bidding. Providing corrupting forces with a single target makes their work child’s play.
2) Since a hierarchy concentrates power, that concentrated power attracts all the wrong people into government and sets in motion what I call the “cesspool effect.” The cesspool effect is a naturally occurring phenomenon whereby people of questionable character and dubious motives are drawn to the power and money of government, then in turn draw others of their type into the offices around them…
Have you ever taken a moment to consider what kind of people run for political office? Since most good, honest people are busy doing real, productive things in the world and are not motivated by the desire to have power over others, running for office is left mostly to a rather motley pool of potential candidates: charismatic Illuminati family members and Freemasons; attractive, intellectually underdeveloped people with a sense of entitlement and grandeur; favored sons and daughters carrying on the family business (politics); clueless crusaders who are trying to “change the world” (even though most of them barely understand how the world really works); sharp criminals trying to put themselves within arms reach of the biggest pools of money; and slick opportunists who want power, sex, and whatever else they can parlay from being in government. This is quite a lovely bunch we’re left to choose from, is it not?
Of course, good people do sometimes run for office, but they find themselves greatly outgunned. Since honest people are prone to following campaign finance laws, they often get outspent by those who respect no boundaries. And when they do get in office, they find themselves amidst a very bad element, and are often subject to bribery, intimidation and blackmail. Most succumb to corruption or leave office, with only a few – if any — remaining to fight the good, but futile, fight.
Once ensconced in office, the corrupt find themselves threatened by any honest person in an elected or appointed post. They therefore collude to drive the honest ones out of office and bring in other unsavory people, thereby intensifying the cesspool effect. A crooked governor, for instance, can be held in check by an honest attorney general. But if that governor can help maneuver an unscrupulous friend into that office, “he” can run all of the scams he wishes, and working together, they can launch even grander schemes of villainy. In this way, standing hierarchical government becomes progressively more criminal over time.
We see the result of this cesspool effect in the current-day federal government of the U.S. It is an organization of such brazen and thorough corruption that it boggles the mind. The governments in virtually all other nations are no different. Some are simply better than others at putting up clean-looking facades.
3) Hierarchy breeds megalomaniacs and sheeple. When someone takes or is given power over the lives of others, there is a progressive tendency for “him” to view himself as smarter and grander than those he rules, and this results in arrogance which leads to bad decisions. Hitler’s generals received a great lesson in this principle during the campaign against Russia, as did Mao’s followers during the Great Chinese Famine.
On the opposite end of this, as power and responsibility over their lives is taken or given away, the people become progressively more weak and irresponsible under a hierarchy. In this, the “sheeple” are no different than children whose parents decide and do everything for them: their growth is retarded. Hierarchy thus turns its subjects into spoiled, incompetent, dependent children and retards humanity’s progression from a herd of primitive apes to a civilization of developed humans.
So this is the second concept I offer: since hierarchy is antithetical to government by the people, a proper government must be anti-hierarchical in nature. In the next entry, we’ll explore the structure of elections before going on to outline a system of government that incorporates the three concepts: fractal democracy.
For the first part of this series, click here: Why standing government must be replaced by coalescent government
With love…
Share this:
EmailFacebook46TwitterLinkedInGooglePrintRedditTumblrPinterestPocket
This entry was posted in Solutions on July 28, 2015.

[CHRISTINA]

Solutions, Part 3: Behold the Insanity of Current Elections and Imagine Something New
Have you ever looked at an election ballot…

…and realized…
> you didn’t even know all the various offices were up for election?
> you didn’t personally know any of the dozens of candidates, except for one or two whose hands you might have shaken one time?
> you didn’t even recognize most of their names, except for maybe the ones running for the biggest offices or the ones you saw on yard signs?
> you didn’t know their stances on the issues of the day, except for what you might have picked up from a canned political commercial or from a superficial answer on some “voters information” questionnaire?
> that even in the cases in which you were acquainted with a candidate’s stances on certain issues, you knew that he or she was almost certainly blowing hot air and telling you what you wanted to hear?
So on what basis did you end up choosing each candidate? Because you saw his yard sign? Because of her party affiliation? Because he was more attractive than the other candidate or had a better smile? Because you agreed with her public stance on your “hot button” issue, even though you knew she was probably lying and would give little more than lip service to the issue once she was in office?
Asking yourself all the questions above, have you ever come to appreciate that when you cast a ballot under our current system, you are voting for complete strangers whose true agendas you don’t know to take offices of which you have little or no working knowledge? How can that ever lead to a well-functioning government of the people, by the people, and for the people? Since it was the system you were brought up in, you have accepted it as normal and the way things should be. But if you stand back and take a hard look at it, it’s actually quite insane and unworkable, isn’t it?
Now let’s imagine something entirely new…
Imagine a system where you’d vote for only one representative, and it would always be someone you personally know.
Imagine that you could talk to that representative face-to-face on the issues that concern you and build a real human relationship with him or her.
Imagine your vote and your influence on other people’s votes being very significant to that representative — that you are not just one insignificant vote out of thousands or millions.
Imagine that you could replace that representative with someone else you personally know whenever he or she steps out of line.
Imagining this, you begin to move your mind towards a sane and workable representative democracy — one that is built on real human relationships, not on abstract groupings of nameless, faceless demographic herds.
But what form would such a system take? Having considered this question, I’ll offer you my perspective in the next entry. And to give you a little hint, it is the polar opposite of a hierarchy.
Love always…
Share this:
EmailFacebook3TwitterLinkedInGooglePrintRedditTumblrPinterestPocket
This entry was posted in Solutions on September 29, 2017.

[CHRISTINA]

Solutions, Part 4: The only way to set up a democracy that works
This is how you set up true democracy…
1) I take responsibility to reach out to the neighbors on my street or in my apartment building, and I’ll set up a time and place where we all can meet weekly to discuss our concerns and hopes. Only a few might show up at first, but if I keep notifying everyone of the time and place of the weekly meeting, more will show up when things start getting rough. And at times of real crisis, ALL will likely come. This will be the beginning of my block council.
After I set up my block council, I’ll reach out to everyone I know and encourage them to do the same where they live. I’ll also take responsibility to reach out, face-to-face, to the people on the next block until I recruit an organizer who will get their block together. In this way, the community-building will spread.
2) Once block councils form, each one can elect a representative to meet with the representatives of the neighboring block councils. They can then discuss the concerns and hopes of the people on their blocks. Ideas will be shared and consensus will start to form. This will be the beginning of the community council.
3) Once community councils form, each one can elect a representative to meet with the representatives of the neighboring community councils. They can then discuss the concerns and hopes of the people of their communities. Ideas will be shared and consensus will start to form. This will be the beginning of the local council.
4) Once local councils form, each one can elect a representative to meet with the representatives of the neighboring local councils. They can then discuss the concerns and hopes of the people of their localities. Ideas will be shared and consensus will start to form. This will be the beginning of the area council.
5) Once area councils form, each one can elect a representative to meet with the representatives of the neighboring area councils. They can then discuss the concerns and hopes of the people of their areas. Ideas will be shared and consensus will start to form. This will be the beginning of the regional council.
6) Once regional councils form, each one can elect a representative to meet with the representatives of the other regional councils. They can then discuss the concerns and hopes of the people of their regions. Ideas will be shared and consensus will start to form. This will be the beginning of the global council.
This simple process of individuals talking to their neighbors to form a community, and those communities reaching out to form broader communities, can cover the entire global population in just these seven steps:
1) Asserting individual sovereignty.
2) Forming block councils.
3) Forming community councils.
4) Forming local councils.
5) Forming area councils.
6) Forming regional councils.
7) Forming a global council.
And each council at each level would need no more than 70 people, and this allows everyone at each level to know each other well. It also allows the voice of every single person to truly matter.
With this seven-tired council structure, the entire population of the Earth, if it were evenly distributed, could be represented by councils no larger than 45 people…
individual (1) x block (45) x community (45) x local (45) x area (45) x regional (45) x global (45) = total people (8.3 billion)
Since populations in different regions (and different blocks) can vary, though, the sizes of the councils at each level would vary. For instance, populous nations such as India and China, if treated as regions, would need councils of up to 70 people…
individual (1) x block (70) x community (70) x local (70) x area (70) x regional (70) = total people (1.68 billion)
And the United States, if treated as a region, would need councils of about 50 to cover the entire population…
individual (1) x block (50) x community (50) x local (50) x area (50) x regional (50) = total people (312.5 million)
As I expand and enhance this article, I’ll explain the very simple rules that would make this system work, and I’ll go into the many benefits it offers. I call this system of government “fractal democracy,” and it is based on the concepts of personal human relationships, anti-hierarchy, decentralization of power, and self-organizing collectivization. It is a way that humanity can cooperate and unite on a global level without the need for artificial states or a troublesome ruling elite.
It’s also as simple as the boogers in your nose, and it has to be that simple in order for people to actually understand it and do it.
Till later, much love….
Share this:
EmailFacebook2TwitterLinkedInGooglePrintRedditTumblrPinterestPocket
This entry was posted in Solutions on October 7, 2017.