System, law & strategy are theory, you act & decide.
 ----------------------------------------------------

 All the things presented here comprise theory:
 - Theory of economic principle, contextual principle (land, money,
   management power), laws, additional details.
 - Theory of state principle, proposals for democratic systems and
   rule of law.
 - Theory on strategies for influencing the status quo in the context
   of parliamentary semi-democracy and capitalism (the ruling systems
   in the world today), with an emphasis on how to self-organize to
   defeat internal corruption.

 This is all theory, abstract theory. A system of laws, regulations.
 At times it contains examples of protocols that could be followed,
 or be used as a starting point to create an agenda, to make the
 changes toward this system go reasonable and with as few damage as
 possible, with an emphasis on how to implement the given system (rather
 then what to do with the system that came before it.)

 You have to note that this is theory, it is strategic theory, and it
 is are not situational commands. It is up to you to use your own
 thinking on the level of general theory and strategic change theory,
 and your understanding and thinking about your own situation, to create
 the actual decisions on your own and by your own ultimate judgement.

 This contains legal protocols to form councils, they do not contain
 the decisions made by those councils.

 It is important to realize this separation between general theory
 and action in real life, because otherwise you migth believe that
 once this stuff breaks through (if ever), I (jos) would lead it and
 direct it, and the many would do as I say. I have already theorized
 that such is a disastrous strategy, and therefore out of the question.

 Once this stuff breaks through, per strategy the stream of ideas and
 situational reactions proposed should dry up. Because it is up to you,
 you must populate it if you want to. It is no more then a boat with
 a sail, it isn't going anywhere without you in it rigging the sails
 and setting a course to your liking. First of all it is impossible
 to direct tens of political groupings in hundreds of nations. Secondly
 a central directing office means it is not a democracy but a subjugative 
 tyranny. Thirdly, I'm probably dead quickly anyway, or forced under,
 if the system is thought of a threat by certain people who could lose
 a lot of money and power, and I was being directing it. If I direct it,
 murdering me would be a nice way to demoralize it all.

 Are you 'following the orders of Pythagoras' when you compute the
 long side of a straight angled triangle ? Or are you rather, having
 noticed the truth of a^2 + b^2 = c^2, conducting that law under
 your own conscience and understanding, as a tool to be used ? It is
 no different with anything here: it is a theoretical tool that can
 be used, after you prove it in theory and practice for yourselve.

 It is also for the long term important that you run it all by yourselve,
 so that no central subjugative tyranny may survive "me." I don't like
 to talk about "me" because it is irrelevant, but to talk about me in
 the sense of removing me from the equation can matter a little.

 This whole thing is: leaderless. I'm not the leader over it any more
 or less then you. There is no leader. To the degree I'm the leader over
 it: I abdicated and are gone, you are on your own, that's the way
 it must be. Then it can grow and shine, maybe (provided you catch the
 errors which might be in it, I guess, if any).

 It may be that all this here (www.socialism.nl) constitutes an easy
 to follow recipe for complete change and absolute democracy and lasting
 social stability leading to near perfect social justice in the long
 term (potentially). But that doesn't mean it is more then an advice. It
 is not an order coming down with force, merely a suggestion that this
 - in my opinion - seems a good way to go about these issues of social
 justice. That is all. The systems are there to be populated by *you*
 and not all positions be populated by *me* (or play-acting pretences
 of me).

 Very important to realize this: we are equal, nobody is boss here, we 
 are equal. If I die it is as bad as if you die. The protocols are there
 for the governance and decision making. I'm not the boss, but if the
 protocols are agreeable then that leads to who/what ends up boss. That
 is boss, that's it. I'm not boss, or king or whatever. Realize that if
 you want to succeed, because it is up to you all the way every turn.
 It is up to you.

 It isn't even a boat: it is a plan on electronic paper, words and
 graphics. It is nothing, it fits 8 times on a mini-storage device the
 size of a pink-nail (2010). It is a plan for a boat, measurements of
 beams and connection diagrams, and a building plan for where to get
 the wood and tools. A plan is not a boat, it doesn't float, it goes
 nowhere, it is next to nothing as such. In the whole planet is is
 as big as a few square millimeter. What will happen is all up to you.

 I always disagreed when people said: this/that architect build that
 building. The architect of a building hasn't build anything. He made
 the plan describing the building, something quite different isn't it.
 Someone else build it, made it happen for real. The way to talk is to
 say: this building was build by so and so, such and such drew up the
 architectural plan and so and so checked it for errors, so and so
 delivered the materials and so and so kept the books, such and such
 did the floor pannels while so and so was ... The architect for it
 was working from a number of demands layed down by so and so, who
 had was instructed by so and so ...

 It is the same with this thing, if it happens by your action. I didn't
 make this, I drew up a plan on paper and that's all, flowing from some
 general wishes for social justice and stuff. That is all. Writing a
 novel is probably a lot harder, too. Fortunately for me, this stuff
 doesn't have to be entertaining to read. For lack of real talent in
 entertainment, I had to make this up, being crazy enough to try the
 unthinkbale I guess.

 It is entirely possible, even likely, that if the architect of a
 building in question actually was on the job building it, even just
 doing a small part in rigging the iron for the foundation, or pouring
 the concrete, or operating the machines to pound into the soil some
 foundation pillars, that from sheer incompetence in those trades the
 building collapsed after building it further. Having learned how
 to compute the weight of the building and applying the knowledge to
 how big the foundation must be, is one thing. How to rig the steel
 in the concrete columns of the actual building, is that the same
 thing as operating the calculator on a desk, no. It seems like it is two
 things, being good in the one thing means no time to learn the other 
 thing. Being very good at one thing means even less time for the other.
 Two things that need each other on a complicated building at least.
 A simple building can be build even without an architect, but not
 without knowing how to handle the materials reasonably. It is a cooperation,
 if any one part falls out, someone will probably manage to fill in the
 gap when needed, become better at it then, ignoring other directions
 of learning ... then who is the more essential ? Everyone is equally
 important for it all, the future can go many ways. Without cement,
 buildings will still be there, without architects, people will manage
 to put a roof over their heads all the same. Without people knowing how
 to handle the building material, all the architects would start to
 put stone on stone and within a few years they would be able to build
 a small hut and live in it, forgetting how to make up complex buildings
 from glass and steel.

 If not for this, if this happens, maybe something better would have
 happened. Who can tell for sure ?! Who can say how it would have gone ?
 I can not, maybe you can ? Who knows, maybe one day we will know more,
 maybe we will know less; maybe someone knows, I don't know. Guessing
 is one thing, and short term is easier, but beyond that.