This flexible size is not replicated in the State model because the State
model is a more serious organisation (Sovereign), and deals with a continuum
of people in a wider area. They will have to measure up by forming properly
sized voter-groups which all will carry a certain political weight by their
number. The uniformity across the nation allows it to integrate.
Political parties (o-3)
1. Open market between the sister parties, each party does only attempt
to organise a minority, for example maximum 10% of the people or 10%
of the politically active people. 2. The DAVID sister parties, who can
each have their own nuances in their interpretation of a DAVID system (or
even disagree with important parts of it), play the proposed Constitution
internally as a way of keeping the party loyal to the members, and to
become familiar with the new system (and correct mistakes in it if any,
or make improvements, or just being creative). 3. The party is internally
an absolute democracy, no holding back. Because it is an absolute internal
democracy, it is probably a good idea to get an idea that the people who want
to become members do so honestly. Members shouldn't be loyal to the party,
because even a party as democratic as this might go bad. 4. When there is
a disagreement on the course of the party and a part of it wants to split
away, then that split of the party is a good thing because it increases
the offerings on the political market. The smallest group that splits
away should get ample of opportunity to ask others to join the split,
have access to make their points, and then the split can occur in good
order. The parties can later cooperate at will.
5. The party runs empty pocketed, membership costs nothing and large
donations are not accepted from any source except members, including the
existing Government. Some nations have a system where political parties
get public money, which may be fine for non-revolutionary parties, but in
this system serious changes are the goal hence a financial dependency on
what we want to change could produce political corruption. The same is true
with banking interests, the rich, land owners, and so on, we can not accept
their donations because they buy political loyalty with that money. Them
buying our political parties is bribery. Things that cost money will have
to be billed to those members that want them, everything brought together
from donations from the members for that particular thing. This makes
party finances somewhat of a headache, but it is probably worthwhile, and
it keeps the people who are more active in the party in line because with
fewer money they are limited in their activities. They may not like it,
but it keeps power at the base: constantly having to ask the members if
they support something means they are boss. A cash poor political party
is likely more run by volunteers and part-time working persons.
6. Where there is no way to win power in Government being a minority party,
for example in a winner-takes-all voting system, the parties will have
to combine in confederations of maximum looseness, and break out into
independence whenever possible.
7. The first attempt to destroy the Empire is by asserting national
Sovereignty in the national Parliaments or other platforms of political
power. A time frame to destroy the Imperial Parliament by infiltration is
hard to give because the Empire will possibly 'strike back' with immoral
legislation knowing this attack is coming. The majority will of the people
has to be respected of course, but only per area. Secession is great,
pulverising the Empire is better.
When we are strong in the nations and there is a good chance we can dominate
an Imperial Parliament, the word it can be decided by a majority of the
DAVID sister parties in the empire to suddenly participating in Imperial
Parliamentary elections. To flood that system and then rip it out by legal
measure. We should not get stuck in the Imperial political system but
pull out all our people to the last man/women if we fail to destroy the
empire in that operation. A plan should be drawn up to participate into
what elections and when we have failed and pull out. We may then have
to wait year or decades before trying again. If it is decided to pull
this operation over several or one more election, then at least all the
positions should be given to other people to prevent the DAVID system to
get stuck in the empire. Imperial parliament.
Empires that do not even have an Imperial Parliament, or who's voting
systems are thoroughly unreliable will probably have to be destroyed by
direct action. For example street revolution (o-4) supported by a scheme-5
or even scheme-6 military uprising (see below). There are no guarantees of
military peace between the nations, it's called freedom. Empires are too
big to be managed properly, therefore they corrupt, its people turn into
intellectual children without the hope of having any influence until the
empire finally destroys itself.
8. The political parties should not use shoulder insignia in the colours
blue on white for the Constitutional positions because those colours are
reserved for the revolutionary scheme (o-4). 9. These political DAVID
parties have their own ways beyond the role society may have assigned
to them. They are political parties in the widest sense of the word:
groups of people that want something. 10. The international arena exists
only as a publication of agreements or disagreements reached between two
or more parties from different nations. There exists no organisation that
bills itself as an international element, especially not exclusive. The
international element exists as an ongoing vacuum of complete freedom,
into which various parties their agreements and disagreements exist. It
is important not to start up an Imperialist system of our own.
Flag of the D.A.V.I.D.-ist International, which is not an organisation
but merely a banner below which to conduct multilateral party meetings.
11. Marches in this system are considered having little to no power, they
are not a properly organised military revolution, but often appear to
threaten such action by their numbers and location. They are potentially
dangerous because violent enemies may make lists of participants and
even ambush them. Marches can be engaged in combat through provocation,
the violence will then be used to paint the people in the march bad.
The chanting and obstruction of traffic, sometimes occupations of buildings
or squares, causes the demonstration to become a nuisance to some people
undermining support for the cause. If numbers are not on our side we will
simply have to retreat. Starting to scream and get in peoples way is not
likely going to help, on the contrary.
Hence, in this system the demonstration is primarily for ourselves,
to socialise and feel good. We dress nice, carry perhaps some signs
but not too many not to appear silly. We do not (as a rule) obstruct traffic
or occupy squares. The best rule is that small children find it amusing.
For the more serious efforts a trained internal order force should be set up
(can be done along the lines of a military or police organisation) which
is to quell rioters and hand them over to the authorities. This way we
show that we are a safe haven for the Sovereignty. Our demonstrations
are not a forced attempt on the buildings where power tends to be
concentrated, therefore we can actively avoid such buildings. This calms
existing order forces, perhaps opens them up for our cause. Then we
will also have little trouble avoiding the association with rioters who
have a tendency to congregate there. When we organise an armed force
to overthrow the existing order, we will do so properly (see o-5, o-6
instead), not unarmed and untrained with with absurd combat strategies. An
interesting activity during our marches is to hand out debating material
both internally and to passers by, while allowing others to hand their
materials to us so that we can find the best solutions. (See further
http://www.law4.org/party/nl/david-we)
-here
Revolution (o-4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.law4.org/sheet1.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheet 1
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A BETTER FUTURE ?
analysis
* We can not build without a political/economic solution: analysis,
solutions, laws. A system of society/law must be invented, and then a
way to get it (overcoming distortion of democracy by Capital). This
sheet proposes a certain solution, worked out in detail elsewhere.
* Trading of products and services is (should be) a protection for the
people that produce them. To be fair this demands equal power between
all people.
* The things that go wrong without justification, are the result of
the greedy and unaccountable management invested in by the gambling
private financiers for their own sake (Capitalist distortion of the
free markets).
solution
* All investment money becomes a democratic tool, no more private
gambling with people's lives by the unproductive financial investment
sector.
* Companies become democracies when the business starter leaves.
Starter gets compensation and a share of future profits.
* Land for nature and public utility is subtracted from the total of
the Nation first, what remains is divided equally. What you can do
with it is limited by democratic government to prevent chaos. You can
not sell/lose this right, but you can rent it out.
* Sectors of productivity where competition for consumer favour does
not work because there can't be enough competitors or the cost of
bankruptcy is too high that it can't be allowed anyway, are directed
by democracy/negotiation.
* Money is transferred to a new (not global) currency to flush out
private Capital. The money and debt of people is transplanted to the
new money, but a maximum (30 times average?) is set for everyone, what
is more is not transplanted to the new money (it stops existing).
* The maximum size of a Nation will be 100 million voters, each Nation
will be fully sovereign.
method
* First thinking about (this and/or other) solutions, improving them
where needed. See for theory, Constitution proposal, technology:
http://www.socialism.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.law4.org/sheet2.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheet 2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A PEOPLE'S GOVERNMENT ?
* Make sure the conditions are favourable: no international war threat
because of these changes, National majority which has declared itself
openly in favour.
* People group per 50 or (a little?) more, elect one voter block
housekeeper. This housekeeper is responsible for proper voting
procedure. Elect a delegate / representative. Any delegate can be
replaced at any moment if the voters of its block elect someone else.
* Delegates group geographically per 50 or more to form Local
Government. Delegates elect from between themselves a chair person; it
has no vote, it is responsible for the associated voter block
housekeepers. This Local Government Council first decides on a Council
name by agreeing a majority vote has been reached on a name, handles
emergency situations, sets and publishes its agenda points for the
next meeting. Unless there are emergencies, agenda points can only be
handled if they have been 7 days on the public agenda. Proposals for
new law require more time: 2 month' on the agenda. Taking this delay
serious prevents chaos and is more democratic. If there are a lot of
delegates in a local Government body, they can group again together to
form 50 groups of local delegates. Each delegate group sends one delegate
for Local Government.
* Proposed/default meeting places: Monday 1st and 3rd of the Month in
the city-centre or first suitable location to its North, if none there
first suitable location to the east of the line city centre / North by
rotating that line around the city like the arm of a clock. Tuesday
every week the same in neighbourhoods (according to name or geography).
Wednesday on 4 O'Clock in the neighbourhoods in the street which sorts
lowest in the alphabet. Thursday the delegates which have been elected
by other delegates in the city centre or neighbourhood centre.
* When you get things right, look at other cities and make sure they
get it right.
* Entire Nation: Divide the Nation in blocks not larger then 100 million
potential voters (adults or all persons). Divide this Nation in 50 blocks
with (about) equal numbers of delegates. Each 50th of the Nation's
delegates, elects one delegate for National Government. This "Country
Council" works like the Local Government Councils: agenda points, delegate
replacement. Elect the Electoral Committee (EC), that is 10 persons on a
National ballot directly by the People, see Constitution for the rules.
Decide whether you want a King Elect, if so the oldest in the EC will
become King Elect. The EC can be elected and next to it a Referendum
on whether the People want to start with a King Elect in place. This
King only has power if the delegates create chaos and the courts agree
this is the case. The EC can call new elections, also for themselves
by stepping down. This King has to be re-elected after having had real
power for one year (see Constitution for the exact rules).
* It is a system of Law, not a system of unlimited representative
power, Referendum results are binding. The Local Government deals
with local problems and can make law to the degree the Country
Council allows it. The Country Council handles National issues,
maintains the Constitution and Currency, solves problems between
Local Governments. The Courts maintain the system: Courts of Justice
solve legal disputes, Judge Courts judge potential mistakes there, the
National Law Court interprets the Law if there are legal disputes on
the meaning of the Law. There is no rules higher then the Constitution,
the Police enforces the Law. The Courts will have to accept the new
Laws, but all law that does not conflict with the Constitution, remains
as is, until it is explicitly changed by the proper legal procedure.
* Take responsibility for the Nation, and be accountable. Uphold the
law, fight crime. The Country is not embedded in an International
nanny system, but fully sovereign to do what it wants. You will get
the kind of country according to the effort put in.
http://www.socialism.nl
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.law4.org/sheet3.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheet 3
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A new form of Government:
A new form of Government can be established, where people group in
small groups selecting a representative. These representatives combine
to form councils. Below is how this is to be achieved in actuality.
See also http://www.socialism.nl/plan_joshb/sheet2.txt (revolution) and
http://www.socialism.nl/gov.html for additional ideas ...
Dividing into groups:
- The women will take the lead.
- The women will go to the houses if the people are inside.
- The men will stand on one side and the women on the other, two
groups. The men will attempt to remain calm.
- The women will attempt to set up these voter groups properly.
They will make proposals to the men, ask assistance of the
men for certain tasks. The men will then reject or accept the
proposals of the women and give the women their arguments. The
women will then discuss that and see how to proceed.
- It is undefined in the (proposed) Constitution how the voter groups
are formed, the idea is not to create women and men voter groups,
although you could do that also if you like. The idea was to have
mixed groups of men and women, men and women in the same voter
groups, but that is neither an obligation of any kind. The proposed
Constitution literally says:
_3.1.d People Government
One group of adults assemble out of their own initiative.
Once they have chosen from between them a vote block housekeeper
that is responsible for correct voter registration and verification,
they are allowed to have one representative, which can be anyone in
or out of that block. The People or in their absence the Country
Council decide on the minimum size of a voter group.
The minimum size for a voter group is: ..50 persons.
Creating these 'voter groups' is the first task at hand in setting
up this form of Government. Only to make that go as smooth as possible
is the initiative in that task proposed for the women, because they
probably will do it better, and the most power hungry / aggressive men
will not be able to dominate the situation for power games.
- If there is disagreement between the women then the oldest five
women will form a committee of order and they are responsible for
letting things go calmly and properly, whatever is decided.
+ In case these things happen with actual groups standing outside,
it may be nice at some point if there is some drinks for everyone.
Because when groups are outside either something good, or something
bad may happen, but when everyone has something to drink how can
something bad happen - then something good will happen. Everyone
will calm down a bit, hopefully. Sharing a drink means friendship
between all people. As a practical issue: bring your own cup out
of your home ? In all the happenings it won't be nice if someone
loses its cups by accident, or if people need to concern themselves
with such logistics also on top of what might have to be done.
- The men can constantly say yes or no, and give their arguments, and
the women can constantly make new proposals. If there is no solution
then the women can propose to go on another day, and go home.
- If the men are unruly, the younger men must listen to the much older
men as if they where their fathers and as if they where small children.
- It is best to take enough time for everything and not to rush,
because in the rush someone may feel oppressed and jump up, and that
may cause others to jump up, and then because of the rushing everything
may break down. When in doubt, stay calm and do nothing, or talk
to the person next to you and don't scream and shout and whatever.
- Some individual men should not think they should go and stand with
the women because they think they can, they must all leave the women
to do their thing. For a male to go stand there is to attempt to
gain power and that is exactly the big problem with the men, more
then with the women. By trying to stand with the women that man is
rather proving he is exactly that kind of problem ! Just stand and
wait on the women, remain calm. When the men are calm, they can be
very smart and useful in the whole process, the women can use that.
- This would all take place per block of homes roughly, so the women
and men of these blocks will form groups of what are going to be
the voter groups once the people are properly divided. That dividing
and making up the groups is the role the women have. Once the groups
are formed then they rule by their mixed majority of men and women.
It is quite a simple task, but it can mean chaos/failure if it isn't
being accomplished properly. The women should not feel rushed to
accomplish it, they can take hours or days or even weeks to get it
together: what they want.
- Divide per 50 group houses in each street starting to count from
house number 1. Usually: 1,2,3,...48,49,50. Then 51,52,53...99,100.
Etc.
- The remainder in a street that does not have at least 50 adults in
its group is to find another such group nearby to establish at least
50 persons. If none can be found they can ask for other groups who
have more then 50 to join them until they also have at least 50
persons. If this is impossible or if there is only a few in the
remainder, they can ask to join other groups nearby.
- If a group has more then 104 adults who want to join in this effort,
that group can split in 2 groups each at least 50 persons. For
example the part with the lowest house numbers and the part with the
highest.
- Eventually all groups should at least have 50 persons, groups with
fewer then 50 persons do not count as groups. Either they find enough
people or they may want to disperse into the other groups. It is not
important that groups have exactly 50 persons, a little bit more is
better because if someone leaves you don't immediately lose your
right as being an official voter group. Anywhere from 50 to 60 or even
70 (a bit large though) is fine, it is your choice. No matter its
size, each group has only the right to send in one representative.
Choosing a representative:
- Choose someone who will be responsible for voting inside the group,
and to maintain a list of who is in that group. That person is the
administrator of that group, or its housekeeper, it's servant. It has
no power whatsoever.
- Then elect a representative. The representative has no power whatsoever,
it only has a right to participate in a council once properly elected.
The power stays with the voter group, the representative is the servant
of the voter group, not its leader, there is no leader of the voter group.
The voter group leads itself through its own majorities and who wants
to join that group and is allowed to join it by those already in it.
Rights:
- You don't have to participate with anything. You don't have to be part
of any voter group, you don't have to attend any meetings of your voter
group if you want to be part of one, you can quit any and all voter
groups at any time for unstated reasons.
- You can choose of what voter groups you don't want to be a part.
- There is no rule that says a voter group must consist of people in the
same area, you can form a voter group from all across the nation if you
want to.
- The voter group can elect another voter group administrator/housekeeper
any moment.
- The voter group can elect another representative any moment.
- You can only be part of one group. If you try to be part of multiple
groups you are guilty of voting fraud and this may not go unpunished.
- Voter groups are only an election model, the voter groups do not comprise
production groups or socialising groups or fighting units of whatever else.
Voter groups exercise political power in their own interest by
influencing their representative. Note that the common interest is part
of that interest.
- Every 5 years there is elections of delegates, all across the nation
at the same time.
- A delegate must do what it has promised, or the Court can replace it.
- The proceedings of Government are public.
- The Government is obligated to follow the will of the people.
- A block can elect anyone as their representative, the delegate does not
have to be part of that voter block or live in the area.
Referendum:
- By gathering 10% of signatures for a Referendum, the Referendum must be
held. The non-votes in a referendum are given to the concerning council(s),
where each delegate will get an equal share. The combined tally of the
votes and taken over non-votes yields a binding decision. This decision
can only be broken by another referendum having more votes, but the
number of votes that is counted for a previous referendum is slowly
lowered when time passes so that a Referendum that happened about 70
years ago will have no greater power then a regular Government delegates
decision. Also a two third amount of votes will break any previous
referendum on the same issue. This system dynamically combines referendum
power with representative power, where non-voters apparently choose to
leave the issue to the representative system, who will then indeed
actually vote those votes. The deterioration of the power of a previous
Referendum means the future is not decided by the (distant) past, and
eventually the power slowly comes back to the representatives.
Delegates:
- Delegates are to meet up with at least 50 to form a local council,
the local council rules by its own majority on local issues. The
local council is not sovereign, sovereignty lies at the national
council, the supreme law court, etc. The local council does not own
the homes of the people in its area, it does not issue its own
money, it does not form its own army, it does not own the businesses
in the area, and it may not have power over government activities
and organisations that are doing work for a larger area.
- The elected delegates have a right to group in groups of 50 in
larger or smaller areas, these 50 sections of delegates can all
elect one representative, it must be someone from within that
section. They can not elect someone outside that section. This
way a council can be formed over larger areas, while within that
area the smaller councils still persist. The area size difference
between both councils dictate their respective responsibilities.
This way local councils could be involved in highly local issues
in a neighbourhood. Over the whole city such a city wide council
deals with city wide issues, leaving the highly local issues to the
local councils. The entire nation is divided into 50 sections of
equal numbers of delegates to elect the national council, handling
national issues such an the currency, the Constitution, foreign
policy, differences between other councils, and so on.
- Because the nation is now divided into 50 section for the national
council, it makes sense to elect in each 50th sector a larger area
council as well, taking opportunity of the effort to elect the
national council.
- Once a delegate has been elected by its voter group, and then
was elected by a section of other delegate to represent them also,
that delegate can not once more elect someone to represent him/her.
There are two steps and no more. A third step is against the law,
the police will have to step in and the court will have to dismiss
such a practice if it occurs, following the rules of the constitution.
Operation of councils (obligations):
- Councils are to select a name.
- Councils are to publish one week ahead what they will be discussing.
- If they are going to discuss making/changing a law, it has to be
announced 2 month prior instead of just 1 week.
- Emergency issues can be handled immediately.
- Councils are to elect a chair person, who will lose its voting right
in any debate he/she is chairing.
- Delegates are payed an about average salary for their work per hour,
with certain bonuses if they work full time / much.
- Councils are free to make up their own internal operations if the
national council does not regulate it, but here some suggestions that
may help:
Operation of councils (not obligated):
+ Divide a council into groups of 10 persons or a little more.
+ Each sub-council will debate with itself proposals that come to its
attention.
+ Once a sub-council has made up a proposal that is satisfying to it,
the sub-council approaches another sub-council of its own choice.
+ That other sub-council can accept, amend or reject the proposal.
+ On rejection or amendment the proposal comes back on the desk of
the first sub-council, who will then reconsider it with the remarks
of the other sub-council.
+ Then the same procedure: the sub-council proposes its work to another
sub-council of its choice.
+ Finally a proposal might make it past all sub-council and there seems
to be at least a numerical majority for it.
+ The council convenes a meeting of all sub-councils.
+ Each sub-councils can elect a spokesperson, someone who can reasonably
talk well in public and can represent that sub-councils and the people
in it if needed.
+ The chair person arrives at the proposal, then a debate may occur.
+ After the debate the proposal may come to a vote or it may go back
for re-consideration.
+ If it is voted upon and it wins a majority, then it is an official
decision and it is to be carried out (if that council has the powers
needed to make that decision at least, which are limited by the
Constitution, the law and the power of other councils.)
- The delegates have no right whatsoever to force a made council
decision on anyone, also not on the voter group it is representing.
When there is a problem with the actual execution of a decision,
forcing it through is a matter for the Courts of Justice and ultimately
the police.
- The people always retain the right to change any and all previously
made Government decisions, either through referendum or by selecting
different representatives, or by convincing the delegates to make
a different decision.
National council:
- The national council is the top Government, it makes both laws and
decisions.
- The chair person of the national council is not the head of state.
Electoral Committee and head of state:
- Across the entire nations, all adult people can partake in the
election for the Electoral Committee. This should yield a list
of names who have more or fewer votes.
- The persons not having made it into the 10 persons with most votes
can choose to give their votes to someone who did make it into the
top 10 (this can matter, see later).
- The person with most votes then has the right to take those votes
he/she has more then the person with second most votes, and give
these votes to whomever he/she wants in the entire nation.
- This yields a new list of 10 persons who have most votes, these
10 persons are the Electoral Committee. It is this committee that
has the sovereign task to set election dates, by its own majority.
- The oldest of these 10 is the Head of State.
- This Head of State has no power over Government, makes no laws,
no decisions.
- Once the Head of State has deeply familiarised itself with the
Constitution, process that takes about 9 months, the Head of State
becomes an inspection agency primarily aimed at corruption within
the Government through its right of immediate and full disclosure
of all Government information. This right does not extend into
private homes.
- The electoral committee must always have at least 6 members, and it
must at least achieve having 10 members every 30 years (meaning
once one member steps down, there will be Electoral Committee (EC)
elections after 30 years, unless 5 in total step down in which case
there would be immediate EC elections.)
- The Head of State can take over the Government for one year if the
delegates are in chaos, after that year of dictatorial King rule
there is one month of regular government rule and then a new election
for the EC and therefore head of state.
- The head of state is richly compensated for its services (if any),
but the other 9 members of the EC are prohibited from working for the
Government (they must have private sector jobs, to make sure they
have a more distant and objective position toward the Government and
the head of state).
- The Constitution provides in two modes for the nation: either with
this active role for the Head of State, or with that role becoming
dormant (meaning the Head of State has no special powers beyond the
regular EC membership.) Either mode for the nation is to be decided on
by a special Referendum.
- The EC and therefore head of state function is not hereditary, elections
are open to all.
Constitution:
- The constitution can be altered through a national Referendum, following
mentioned procedure for Referendums, but a constitution changing
referendum must be announced 5 years before it is to be held.
Comparison neo-roman model:
- The rest of the Government model is more or less what we are already
used to in many parts of the world: a government, a police force,
a judiciary. Here taken to make up the separation of powers between:
action (police), decisions on justice (judges), law making and decision
making (councils), inspection (electoral committee and head of state
in its role of sovereign inspector), control (referendum power and
power to replace delegates any moment).
- There is no separation within the representative government as exists
in the neo-roman model between a select ruling few often about 10 in
number (often called ministers), a larger body to which those ministers
owe responsibility and that can ask for new elections (often called
parliament), and what is often seen is a second chamber which looks
at law making and can reject a proposal for new law. In the neo-Roman
model, these 3 parts of neo-Roman government are all formed from
people associated with one of the parties (fractions), so that each
fraction gaining enough votes will have its people in all these three
parts. One could say that these 3 parts of government are more or less
a fake separation, because they are all made from the same clubs that
gained the votes. In this new model proposed here, the role of
'ministers' would be that of either servants or sub-council below
the national council being given a specific management task in a
certain area (for example to print and maintain the currency.)
The role of law proposing, reviewing and passing all fall unto the
council, but they need to honor the 2 month time restraint which is
to make sure there is ample of opportunity to think the laws through.
Essentially a law is a repeating decision, as such closely related
to singular decisions. The suggested way in which councils could
operate, the sub-councils model, also provides the mechanism of
proposal, review, sending back, amending, another review, and so
on, which is a task the second chamber of Government in the neo-Roman
model engages in (often). But in this case it happens within the
council, and it happens at least 5 times instead of at least 1.
+ It is not an obligation but a proposal: have the national Government
travel around in the nation all the time, convening one week here,
then one week somewhere else, so that it never puts down any roots
in one particular city. This to prevent the national Government to
see itself as a conquering force from that city busy with the task
of hauling riches from the rest of the nation to that city.
- Government departments are to be located throughout the nation, this
is a Constitutional obligation. It is good for transparency and
protocol, it spreads the benefit of spending taxation money and
Government associated jobs across the nation, it decentralises power.
+ Most notable changes: the national government would be much smaller in
total size: only 50 persons (the Dutch Government comprises a
"government" of ministers maybe some 10 persons, a 2nd chamber of
150 persons and a 1st chamber of 75 persons, total 285 persons). The
elected persons do not necessarily represent fractions or parties
(although that is also still possible), and therefore it is likely
the debate would be less between entrenched fractions or party
political games for power, it is more individualised. Because the
delegates vote for the national Government and not the people
directly, it is both easier and cheaper to re-elect the national
government, and the campaign people may want to engage in is
directed at delegates (mostly). The delegates in turn are expected
to do their duty and commit to a more thorough investigation into
the competence of their candidates (for whose election they of
course will be politically responsibly, and answering for to their
voting groups). If the Government is constantly and routinely on
the move in the nation, that will be a very obviously different
happening as well. In other words: no more parties, or at least
if they exist (they are invited to) they are not the backbone of
the system.
- The national council selects advice councils for varies issues,
by its own discretion and majority, who have no power beyond
(publicly stated) advice. This is a measure important for stability
and competence. It may be that much informal power resides in these
advice councils, while the national council weighs and selects
proposals from all sides in accordance with the popular will.
Nation:
- Nations are not to be too large, an ideal size would be in the order
of 10 to 30 million people. The Constitution states an upper boundary
of 100 million people.
- People who want to set up a new nation from part of the present
nation can do so by following the (extensive) Referendum protocols.
They must have 1,000,000 people in favour or more, and win several
Referendums in that area. After becoming independent they have a
time where they can grow into the present nation by winning more
referendums. This entire procedure takes many years. There must be
two third referendum majorities 5 years apart to become sovereign
after another 5 years following the second referendum. In these
referendums the non-votes count as against-votes. There must also
not be a referendum once with a majority to stay in the country
during that time with at least half of all people voting in it.
This means that if people really want out in large majority, they
can, but not until it is quite well established they actually want
to break away. The resources are equally divided between both nations.
More:
- These things are all worked out in much detail, the above is merely
a very short summary of some of its aspects, not touching even on
the most important issue of all: the economy. The above only handled
the restructuring of the Government. The economic question is handled
in 4 sectors: money and investment (common good), company ownership
(free market and labour self rule), land and other natural resources
(limited use right distributed to all individuals), infrastructure
and other non-competitive sectors (common good).
For all materials (all free), see http://www.socialism.nl (free
trade in labour, services and products, free dictatorial ownership
over entrepreneurial companies until the starter leaves and company
has 10 or more full time employees.)
Transition to new Government:
- The police and courts should remain in operation and enforce the
laws. Presumably there are no laws that forbid people to combine
and organise, but if they do exist they are to be broken. The police
and courts could refer to natural law, respect for the people, or
being overwhelmed.
- The police and the courts should remain in operation. The laws are
not suspended at any time, the new Government will take over most
laws without any moment of there being no laws. All laws remain
standing unless the councils actively change them in due course of
their protocol.
- The new Government does not attempt to take over the buildings of
the old Government, but either is not located in any particular
building or if it wants to attempts to find another location. If
the old Government wishes to vacate its buildings out of its free
will, then these could become part of the governed public buildings
under the new Government system.
- If the new Government fails then the old Government continues as
if nothing has happened.
- If the new Government succeeds there will be two Governments. It
would not be the first time in history that has happened.
- That Government which organises most people should be the ruling
Government in case of conflicts. Ideally that type of Government
that is not favoured by the majority melts away and merges with
the newly formed Government. Both politically, organisationally,
and infra-structurally.
- It may be that for quite some time there are two Governments, or
that there is disagreement about what Government represents the
majority. This disagreement may not be taken away in case of a
Referendum with a close result, or if there was some kind of
manipulation happening (likely to be claimed anyway).
- If the new Government is not the commonly accepted ruling Government
by clearly a large majority, they should probably do best to take on
a cooperative and service oriented stance with respect to the other
Government, without sacrificing their independence and the potential
sovereignty inherent in the organisation once completed. It is best
not to attempt to steer the councils into conflict with a persisting
old Government. Both Governments may view each other as their own
advice council. If the other Government takes a hostile stance, this
may cost them their remaining credibility, it would be a matter of
time until they melt away. Over time the new Government is likely to
get its things in order and work smoothly, this should mean gaining
credibility and therefore power. Playing nice and for the long
term is therefore probably best, while attempting to behave like a
true Government should, which can also be taken as practising the
new system. Power could come dancing into the quarters of the new
Government because it wants to.
- The old Government shouldn't be completely dissolved until it is
absolutely clear the new Government is up to the task at hand.
It should be possible to quickly reinstall the old system with its
people, even in a few hours, as if nothing had happened, just in
case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.law4.org/sheet4.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheet 4
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Non-Sovereign prototype Government: slow burn revolution.
--------------------------------------------------------
o Considering that once the enemies of justice, peace & prosperity
for all will probably launch vicious oppression and wars when they
see our victory approaching while they still have power, we must
be ready at the soonest possible to do the complete revolution and
take over the nation, some nations, many nations, most nations, all
nations, through, by and for the people that live there.
* Whenever someone decides he or she likes the proposed constitution,
he / she attempts to join in with 50 + 5 reserve = 55 others who
also like this proposed constitution, to form a voter group.
* It does not matter who assembles across the nation in a voter group,
the constitution allows for any grouping, although some residency
correlation is nice (people who live closer have a reason to join in
the same group, but that is not a rule that must be followed: optional.)
* Any group, any political affiliation, any loose individuals, can join
into voter groups and offer delegates, they all meet each other as
equals under the same system with the same rights and responsibilities.
(For extremely opposite groups keep in mind the right to form separate
nations under the system later once it succeeds. Decide on a peace and
unity for the moment, in order to benefit from that later, or it may all
fail.)
* New voter-groups are not seeded with already organised persons, to allow
the new group to form their own culture and ideas. Already organised
people can assist as advisors to new groups, but they should remain
organised in what voter group they are already organised. (This to
prevent insidious control over many voter groups by a small group of
people, who might end up steamrolling / brainwashing people into what
they believe.) Leave it open, leave it to its own. If it goes against
what someone wants then leave it to that group, ultimately the delegates
debate & vote in the councils. It's all taken care off, live & let live.
* The group votes for a housekeeper and a delegate, and furnishes all
with a position patch in the Sovereign colours dark blue on white
(see elsewhere), because even though they are non-Sovereign at the
moment, they are the full prototype of the Sovereign Government.
Once the decision is made to be sovereign, that voter group is part
of the sovereign constitutional Government of the nation.
* To denote their non-Sovereignty, a small red ribbon is placed diagonally
across some of the symbol, in a way that it can later easily be removed.
* These position symbols don't need to be worn, not even once, but it
is a good thing if they are at least ready to stabilise a possible
full revolution (see especially sheets 2 and 3 for sudden total revolution).
* Once 50 delegates are chosen they form councils, and so on, all the
way to the country council. Say as a rule a prototype country council
gets elected once there are at least 50 local councils (50 * 50 = 2500
persons). This to prevent too many separate country councils to emerge
throughout the nation.
* An EC is elected once there is a country council.
* In the case of empires, the local province is taken to be 'the nation'.
Something of the size that fits between 1 and 100 million people
(ideally 10 to 30 million people at the most). In large empires every
geographic/boundary unit of that size would set up its own unified
prototype sovereign country council.
* I think it is better not to attempt to resolve complicated historical
issues of land ownership of separate ethnic peoples: first let's change
the model all together 'hand in hand,' and then once the calm is established
there should be time to resolve these issues peacefully. To try to do
both at the same time risks civil war, and then everyone gets nothing.
In return the case of peoples fewer then the Constitutional minimum
for separation is heard and awarded in principle, but for this these
people must have petitioned the country council before it becomes
sovereign (in some way), or else the Constitution would have taken effect
over them too, and their breaking away without doing the proper protocol
would be a bad precedent of law breaking right away. If they have
petitioned then the Constitution has not landed fully on them yet, until
that petition has fully been reviewed and processed. Without that, the
Constitution would take effect, which would lock smaller peoples in.
Then their only way out would be to change the Constitution or revolution.
-> I hereby petition on behalf of all traditional native peoples, that
their case is heard and awarded, before the Constitution has landed
on their lands taking them in if this is against their will, even
if they have helped in setting up this Constitution, even on their
territories (provisionally, for the sake of the day).
(Let's say that any land issues 'before the Constitution locks in' can
still be resolved outside of the Constitution within the first 20 years
of the Constitution achieving Sovereignty in those lands. In other words:
the Constitution takes 20 years to land on the land after achieving
sovereignty, which is the same time it takes to achieve a new territory
under the Constitution. Nations can of course decide to add provisions
of all kinds to the Constitution, change it in all ways wanted, which
is of course the way it should work in general ... it's an open system.)
* If several country-councils find each other in the same nation, they
are to merge their provincial divisions (after they verified the other
system), and then set up a unified country council. (This is all separate
from any group-internal constitutional system groups may be using, those
group internal structures remain unaffected (obviously).)
* Taking sovereignty means full revolution, see also sheets 2 and 3.
* The prototype non-Sovereign country council proposes to take true
Sovereignty to the grand country council (that is all delegates combined,
who vote individually on an issue), the grand country council takes
the matter to all voter groups. The voters vote individually, the
delegates take these votes to the grand country council and add them
up. The majority in each voter group is found and these one vote per
voter groups are added up, and then the delegates vote on the issue
one vote per delegate. These three results are debated.
There should be a strong ruling support from the people at large,
being organised into this system already or not, or else an attempt
to take true sovereignty could fail. Ideally the people at large
pressure in great number for the taking of sovereignty by the new
constitution and its prototype Government (best these people can do
is actually join the system !).
It is important to get the police and justice system on our side.
It may very well be the case that by waiting with taking sovereignty
we will be afforded sovereignty. If things go right all we have to do
is wait, and eventually the people will scream and beg for the new
system to take over, and the police and much of the justice systems
is stampeding to do the bidding of the new true Government. Anything
short of that, and we risk throwing everything to the wind, because
the sitting Government may retaliate by outlawing us and hunting us,
to protect its own power under claims of insurrection or whatever.
Once sovereignty is taken, pursue the correct protocol (change all
delegates, see elsewhere.) Sovereignty is claimed by removing the
red ribbon over the position symbol.
Sovereignty means that whatever the councils decide gets done, within
the limit of its powers under the constitution at least, regardless
of what any other person or groups say.
* When in doubt: join. Everything merges into the sovereign Government of
the people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.law4.org/sheet5.txt
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheet 5
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Revolutionary check-list
------------------------
[_] Setting up Council Government.
[_] ^ Install committee to compute the new law.
[_] ^ Install committee to create new currency.
[_] ^ Install committee to get the Justice system in order.
[_] ^ Install committee to get the Police in order.
[_] ^ Install committee to start work on Democratisation of
companies liable for it.
[_] ^ Same as immediately above, but for land.
[_] ^ Install a committee to deal with the wealth-maximum, and the
re-mortgaging of existing homes.
[_] ^ Install committee to deal with emergency needs for first
life needs.
[_] Setting up the Government departments, establish the new system.
[_] ^ Decide on what Government departments there should
be, nations typically have departments for the major and
routine tasks of Government. In this system it is proposed
each Department is overseen by a council of 50 persons at
the pleasure of the Government. This council can appoint
subordinate heads who decide on what happens further
down in the organization, or multiple heads for multiple
sub-departments. How the department organizes its work is not
necessarily of national interest and therefore the department
and/or sub-departments can also organize their own internal
democracy. The national government, the 50 person council ruling
the department and the heads it can appoint decide on what
happens and within what parameters, an internal organization
democracy can decide on how it happens as long as it does not
interfere with the national government needs.
[_] ^ Find and ask people if they want to serve in the department councils.
[_] ^ Softly set up a new democratic controlled finance system, which
is to have a great diversity of funds. Think of it as farming,
money is water and companies are crops. The water has to be
distributed carefully, generally in droplets, not in one location
suddenly in a giant amount. Tend the plants carefully, and also
giving small loans easily to the many to have many new company
shoots (ideally on collateral of course).
Notes
Temporary currency can possibly be denominated in
value of average work-time at moment of payment for
future taxation to the Government, + 10%. Such
certificates could potentially have immediate 'real'
value; since they could later be redeemed saving the
owner taxation-costs. All fiat money is like this,
but if such certificates are fixed to a working hour
they could have a more solid value, perhaps attracting
greater trust thus value. They could be traded as money.
This system could give the new Government immediate real
spending power, and attract it to the sovereignty by
certificate owners' need for it being redeemable.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Chart of action, different people only need to run through it
until they are no longer part of a certain selection.
Blue on white voter-group system shoulder insignia.
Black/white group symbols (voter-group, 1st council, 2nd council, sub-councils).
Voter group symbol (can not be used by individual voters).
1st order council (directly elected by delegates)
Delegates group.
2nd order council (elected by delegates)
Note: the sub-council system has the council divided in 5 sub-councils,
who debate which each other and pass each other their ideas on matters
on the table. The public is obviously privy to all that is going on,
and therefore has a chance to interject its opinions. This system is
not part of the proposed Constitutional model but could help with
efficiency, transparency, making it more democratic and undercut power
of minor tyrants.
Armed uprising (o-5)
Flag protocol: this is the scheme-5 flag or "green flag," which
is used to identify this system. The 5 dots below signify freedom of
speech, the dots are individual, while the circle shape in the middle
denotes assembly. These two rights should be "above ground," which
means they are respected in the area. If these rights are not respected
they are buried below the green bar. The flag is either shown with the
green bar up or down, depending on how these rights are judged in the
area by the unit who flies the flag. The words "freedom of speech,
freedom of assembly (for us and our opponents)" are ideally in the
local language or the language of the unit in question.
The goals of the armed uprising is to secure the freedom of (political)
speech and (political) assembly, because with those two rights in good
order all other problems can be resolved by debating and voting. To keep
these armies proper, they appoint their top and 2nd in command military
commanders by an internal democratic system. One such group with a
self-coherent democracy is called a fist, its size is from 2 fighters until
1 Army (~200 000 persons). See illustration for the ranking system of these
armies. Small fists use only direct voting, middle sized fists up to 2500
persons (one regiment) use an adapted voter-group and/or supreme council
size to fit their needs. Larger groups don't bother with setting up any
councils except the supreme council for the fist, unless there is ample
of time to train with these things as a way to get familiar with the new
system. During
training a complete council system can be set up, which then decides
on the training that day.
The internal democracy is called the House Command. The smaller
councils are not needed to run the war, which his run by the military
hierarchy, the Military Command.
Fists can merge into larger fists by merging their house command
structure (see sub-council model above under o-2). A fist could also
remain a fist and subordinate its top office into a larger fist. One
army (wo)man is only part of one house command. When a military
hierarchy integration is desired by roughly equal sized fists than
the house commands can decide they will vote together on the military
structure that is above all their individual sizes, while retaining
exclusive authority over their own fist command. Such voting should
be weighed by the strength of the units, rather then one fist one
vote. The fist of such size naturally having a certain rank controls
that rank by its house command. Smaller militarily integrated fists
do not participate in such appointment.
If top command is taken out of action (killed for example), the rank
below have to temporarily rule by majority vote until single head
command is restored by the house command. One could integrate several
fists of equal size this way as well, which has an echo of the mutual
strategic command. One could initiate cooperation like this and later
install a top military commander for that unit. First testing out each
other, and then bestowing rank properly with better understanding. If
decisions are not decisive enough that way they appoint one of their
own as the temporary head (while the house command is being informed
and works to establish command properly...)
The strategic command needs of several armies are serviced, if so desired
by the Generals and/or house commands, is serviced by high staff Generals
without direct command, who operate as a group (or however they see
fit). The relative ranking of these high generals is not that important,
but can help in case of time pressure. The ranks above lieutenant General
(3 star General) are for the duration of the job, a lieutenant General is
therefore the highest personal rank in this system.
A special branch is trained to handle emergency Government after victory. It
is to set up a system of civil government that is in line with what that
people want. That system may not be what is proposed here, they should be
capable of setting up anything that the people are likely to desire. Note
that if the DAVID239+ system is installed the people can still use that to
change it into what they really want. The people may want to use wearing
symbols as a way to vote on this during Victory, because it will not be
so simple to determine what public will really is. I hope the people will
not be too outraged if a DAVID239+ system is installed against public will,
which is of course a good chance if this system is used by the bulk of the
military uprising, and instead use the mechanisms it gives the public to
change that according to their will. They should hurry because once something
is entrenched it becomes hard to change. Then again, is this system really
so bad ? You be the judge of that, national diversity is certainly something
to be desired. This special branch is called 'purple brigade(s)'.
After 3 month the mandate of purple brigades ends one way or the other,
they ought to both step away from power and be dismissed from power.
Training is to be conducted in such a way that human dignity is
preserved. Ideally people that already know each other form small groups, up
to Sergeant. When a real uprising and larger integration becomes necessary
they can integrate themselves into larger groups, either retaining their
independent fist status (their own house command and military hierarchy),
or merge into larger fists (unite their house commands). By being with
people you know you can prevent your energies to become used by corrupt
uprising systems.
A default uprising is for example a 10% of the people, respecting obviously
the proposed constitutional age for this (Dutch saying "emergency breaks
law"). A casual training of only 2.5 hours a week should already be enough
to cast the ghost of these Armies over the lands, and make the would be
tyrants toss and turn in dread in their sleep and tremble on their knees ...
In this system a fighter becomes an unranked fighter after having walked
40 kilometres within 24 hours, with 20 kilo gram on his/her back, after
which hitting at least once with a projectile weapon a target the size
of a torso. The fighter will have to determine for himself whether he
will be willing and capable of murdering for the cause of free speech
and justice if it becomes necessary. War is murder, it is horrible. Not
waging a revolutionary war against a murderous tyrant can end up being
worse. Trained soldiers and officers can blend sideways into the hierarchy.
These armies do never torture for any reason, and respect the human dignity
of people taken prisoner. When fighting reactionary forces beware of every
possible trick they could think of to see action. It is important not to
torture, among other reasons, because if prisoners are badly treated the
enemy will tend to be less easily persuaded into a surrender.
Military ranking structure: fighter ranks until sergeant (including),
field officers major and colonel, personally held ranks until lieutenant
General (including) ranks for duration of appointment captain General and
higher. Maximum fist size up to captain General (Army). Mutual strategic
command Generals are staff Generals without command advising the captain
generals. Corporal General and higher are flag officers who must have
a character capable both of surrender, or fighting on to the death for
eternal Glory in the halls of Remembrance. The 2nd class is yellowish/gold
the 1st class is light-grey/silver coloured, 1st/2nd class fighters silver.
Reaching the enemy rank and file with the truth and a better future, the
goal these armies fight for "freedom of speech & freedom of assembly for
us and our political opponents" may help persuading the enemy fighters
and officers to join our side.
These armies do not conduct ideological campaigns within themselves, also
not for a DAVID system, because that will possibly repel people who disagree
with all those details from rising up within or with our armies. The idea
is simply to establish these two rights, speech and assembly, no more and
no less. Uniting behind the right to dissent, as it where.
These fighting forces (fists) primarily go off the directions of Brigade
Generals or higher commanders, particularly when there is doubt about
what actions should be taken. In general smaller units then a Brigade
only exist as a potential but do not actually engage in actions outside
the strategies of Brigade sized strength in the area. This is necessary
to disown wild actions of small units. Note that this system as proposed
here, these colours, are likely going to be abused by false flag attacks.
An interesting way to combat people who commit atrocities and then try to
blame us with their actions is to engage in an extensive investigation into
each such false flag attack to expose the guilty party. We might even
engage in guarding targets that might be attacked by a group pretending
to be us, and engage in immediate investigation of such false flag forces
to take them out of action while they haven't even been able to hurt us.
Educating the public about false flag attacks may help to make the public
less gullible to these strategies. The most likely source of false flag
attacks as well as other forms of repression are those who stand to loose
when the DAVID system is implemented (money, land, ownership of companies:
power). A ruling class often operates loosely, each one pursuing their own
interests: hence if one parts conducts an atrocity wearing our colours
and leaving some signs pretending to be us, then ruling class media outlets
might jump to the opportunity to lie about us even if they have no direct
connections with the terrorist networks. They aide the terrorist units
because they are both in the same front and recognise a way to hurt us.
Perhaps we could even buy information on where we will be attacked. We have
to tirelessly denounce terrorism as a strategy and individual acts of
terrorism, both to our own forces and the public at large. (See further
http://www.law4.org/post/004/phalanx)
Adapted the ranking structure for a possible police force. The "3rd
class" ranks are red, they are for non-combat elements which might need
a rank to have command to do some job (for example a medical doctor
may need to have a command in a hospital, non-military people in a
supply chain (optional)).
Military conquest (o-6)
Military conquest is an historical mission of a people, and is therefore
essentially governed by their own creativity and not by this system. However
it may be a good idea to use the laws about a new nation suggested in the
Constitution to deal with the new borders. That way if people end up being
inside what wants to be a new Sovereign nation they can vote on whether
they want that. It would prevent a minority armed force to declare a new
nation over more people who do not want it.
Resistance (o-7)
During ongoing tyranny it may not be possible to organise significant armies
(yet), but it may be possible to organise in secret. The method proposed
here is to use groups of about 5 persons, led by themselves. They try to
behave as perfect and tactical as possible with respect to their secrecy,
using code words and signals and having acceptable explanations for their
whereabouts and actions, and B (and C) plans to switch to if the conditions
are too risky. It is probably best only to accept a new member if everyone
agrees to that first.
One should probably simply stop interacting with other groups or seek
connections with other groups unless one can be certain it is not an
attempt to infiltrate the resistance with fake resistance. It may be
impossible to achieve such confidence with certainty. The tyranny will
probably at least use a dual approach: direct open repression, and setting
up extensive efforts to recruit people for the resistance including for
a time doing some damage to their tyranny in order to attract people into
their clutches. Some risks in resistance will have to be taken, because if
the enemy can win by having everyone suspect everyone then they win by that
effect, which is an effect they will probably want to promote in society
(the baseless suspicion between people).
Protecting truth (o-8)
When it is not even possible to organise a cell resistance, then individuals
could attempt to shield as much of the truth, for example these documents,
until it becomes possible to act.