The Human Consensus
  • Home
  • About
    • About The Book
    • Contact
  • Read sections
  • Blog
  • Poll
  • Order The Book
    • Paperback Edition and ebook Kindle in Europe >
      • Amazon France
      • Amazon Germany
      • Amazon Italy
      • Amazon Spain
      • Amazon UK
    • ebook edition Kindle >
      • Kindle Australia
      • Kindle Brasil
      • Kindle Canada
      • Kindle India
      • Kindle Japan
      • Kindle Mexico
      • Kindle Netherlands
      • Kindle United States

WAR

6/23/2019

1 Comment

 


 
            We  are  made  to  believe  that  a  global  war  is  a  solution  to  a  global  economic/financial  crisis,  presenting  the  opulence  of  Western  Europe  after  World  War  II  as  proof.
 
             War  is  by  far  the  most  expensive  project  man  can  ever  be  forced  into.  It’s  so  expensive  that  it  quickly  depletes  any  resource,  even  that  of  empires.
             How  does  borrowing  billions  further  for  useless  destruction  AND  needless  reconstruction  solve  an  impoverishing  crisis? 
             Something  else  had  to  be  at  work  after  WW II.
             WW I  made  the  global  economic  situation  so  much  worse  that  the  rival  nations  had  barely  the  time  to  catch  their  breath  before  being  forced  into  the  much  more  devastating  WW II  only  two  decades  later. 
 
             But  after  WW II,  the  yet  greater  financial  crisis  and  devastation  was  relaxed  by  the  ingenious  Marshal  Plan  which  consisted  of  American  donations  and  loans  to  what  is  now  known  as  the  Western  European  countries.
             These  donations  were  contingent  on  buying  American  goods,  ensuring  a  rapid  recuperation  for  the  Western  Europeans  and  a  dynamic  industry  for  the  Americans.
 
             The  Marshal  plan  also  shielded  the  devastated  Western  Europe  from  the  temptation  of  joining  communism  and  its  centralized,  utterly  collectivist  social  order  and  marked  the  beginning  of  American  leadership  of  Western  Europe.
 
             Without  the  Marshal  plan,  it  took  almost  forty  years  for  the  Soviet  Union,  the  true  victor  of  WW II,  to  recuperate  from  the  war  effort  and  just  as  it  had,  it  was  tricked  into  enormous  military  expenditures.  To  avoid  the  risk  of  an  extinction - level  third  world  war,  it  attempted  in  vain  to  match  Regan’s  massive  deployment  of  NATO  forces  at  its  borders.  Naturally  it  went  bankrupt,  was  dismantled,  and  contracted  debt.
 
             In  Western  Europe,  the  economic  crisis  was  only  resolved  by  the  Marshal  plan  creating  an  environment  of  abundance  even  if  strings  were  attached.
             A  Marshal  plan  before  WW I  would  have  been  nice…
 
             Consequently  the  solution  to  any  economic  crisis  is  never  the  small,  temporary  and  fickle  abundance  acquired  by  war  at  the  expense of  a  rival,  but  a  planetary  “Marshal plan”  investing  in  science  to  create  a  permanent  abundance  for  all  with  no  strings  attached.
​
             Science  is  now  able  and  ready  to  create  the  only  alternative  to  war:  abundance.  Our  nations  should  negotiate  possibilities  and  modalities  without  delay.  If  we  were  actually  governed  by  Direct  Democracy  where  no  lobby  could  pilot  our  representatives  into  announcing  a  system  change  while  actually  fighting  the   idea itself,  we  would  have  been  in  an  advanced  stage  of  negotiations  already;  the  catastrophic  Political/economic/ecologic  situation  would  have  rendered  it  imperative.
 
             The  only  victors  of  war  are  the  money  lenders  to  both  manipulated  sides/victims,  weapon  manufacturers  and  all  sorts  of  global  parasites.
             War  is  always  about  acquisitions,  be  it  land,  riches,  control  or  markets,  and  in  general  for  the  benefit  of  industrial/economic/financial  conglomerates,  while  the  people  die,  lose  everything  and  burden  their  future  generations  with  debt.
             Instead  of  making  the  victor  richer,  war  makes  all  sides/victims  poorer…  debt…  to  be  paid  later…  always later.
 
             But  the  “winner”  does  have  a  priceless,  immediate  prize:
             It  gets  to  fall  on  its  knees  later  than  the  loser  when  the  debt  acquired  for  causing  destruction  to  the  rival  and  reconstructing  the  destruction  caused  by  the  rival  kicks  in.
 
             Like  a  duel  where  both  antagonists  kill  each  other,  but  the  winner  dies  ten  seconds  later,  enjoying  the  sweetness  of  “the  great  victory”,
             … for  ten  seconds.
1 Comment

Nations   In   Debt

6/23/2019

2 Comments

 
                                                                                       
 


             A  financial  system  of  Global  investment  and  conglomerates  of  private  banks  with  different  names  like  “world bank”,  IMF,  etc.  dispenses  credit  to  countries.
 
             These  credits  are  contingent  on  “reforms”,  insinuating  that  global  investment  is  there  to  correct  and  help  badly  administered  countries.
 
             In  fact  the word  “reform”  refers  to  the  total  deregulation  of  the  receiving  country’s  legislation:  the  “reform”  “liberates”  the  receiving  country  of  regulations  protecting  its  resources,  allows  global  finance  to  walk  in,  invest  in  the  most  lucrative  sectors  and  eventually  control  or  literally  own  the  resources  and  sectors  by  which  the  country  could  pay  back  its  debt.
 
             Countries  have  always  been  unable  to  pay  back  even  the  interests  on  their  debt,  yet…  are  offered  more  debt?  Unpaid  debt  is  the  end  of  both  liberty  and  Democracy.
             Global  investment  will  de  facto  own  and  rule  your  country.
ALL  your  elected  will  only  be  puppets,  in  spite  of  their  posture  of  unmitigated  authority…  And  they  know  it.
 
             If  your  country  is  indebted,  then  get  used  to  watching  all  your  national  lucrative  sectors  “privatized”  (sold)  for  a  fraction  of  their  true  value,  and  nothing  your  representatives  promise  will  change  anything;  it’s  no  longer  their  call.
             But  the  mechanism   is  still  more  sinuous:  another  administration  marketed  as  left  wing  would  be  made  to  re-nationalize  some  formerly  privatized  sector  but  this  time  at  a  steep  price  by  re-creating  or  furthering  the  debt,  for  the  game  to  go  on  unchecked:
             Tic – Toc – Tic – Toc - …
             Tic:  privatization …  you  lose,
             Toc:  re-nationalization …  you  lose.
 
             And  with  the  gold  and  precious  metals  standard  long  abolished,  the  private  banks  will  always  find  a  way  to  render  “legal”  the  creation  of  the  money  mass  needed  to…
             Buy  our  planet…  us  included  (and  our  moon!),
             With  Printed,  colored  paper  we  were  made  to  agree  to  hold  value.
 
             Of  course  we  can  easily  wash  away  all  this,  but  representative  democracy  stands  in  the  way:  it  is  both  the  creator  and  the  guardian  of  the  situation.
 
             To  succeed,  we  need  to  call  upon  our  true  might:


             We  need  to  unleash  Direct  Democracy.
2 Comments

Direct   Democracy

6/16/2019

2 Comments

 
  
 
               
               Closest  translation  from  Greek:  “people  command”  or  “people  sovereign”.
 
               Oxford  definition  of  Sovereign:
               -Supreme  ruler,
               -Possessing  supreme  or  ultimate  power.
 
               The  regime  called  Democracy  was  and  always  is  presented  as  the  only  alternative  to  a  monarchy  or  to  any  authoritarian  regime  headed  by  a  unique  sovereign  and  of  course  his  council.
               This  regime  called  Democracy  was  about  leading  society  according  to  the  desires  of  the  public  through  elected  representatives.
               Most  social  thinkers  at  the  time  thought  that  “representing”  the  public  was  defeating  the  principle  of  “the  people  sovereign”,  but  the  public  lacking  the  means  of  unlimited  interconnectivity  at  the  time,  the  ones  presenting  the  alternative  of  representation  as  “the  great  invention”  had  their  way.
               But  considering  representation  as  “the  great  invention”  is  only  admitting  it  to  be  the  best  alternative  to  “the  people  sovereign”,  even  if  it  is  not  “the  people  sovereign”.
             So  terminologically  the  actual  system  of  representation  may  at  best  be  called  “representative  democracy”,  never  “Democracy”.
 
               What  is  to  be  sovereign?
               In  a  monarchy,  it  is  the  king  who  decides  while  considering  the  input  of  his  council  and  commands  others  to  make  it  happen.  
               In  a  theocratic  regime,  it  is  the  highest  ranking  priest  who  decides  while  considering  the  input  of  his  council  and  commands  others  to  make  it  happen.
               In  any  regime  ranging  from  tyranny  to  any  kind  of  Democracy,  the  procedure  of  taking  the  decision  and  making  it  happen  remains  the  same.
               Being  sovereign  means  having  the  power  to  make  the  decision.
               So  in  true  Democracy,  it  is  the  people  (the  sovereign)  who  should  decide  while  considering  the  input  of  their  council  (the  specialists  in  their  midst)  and  command  the  hired  administration  to  make  it  happen.
               In  a  Democracy,  the  hired  administration  should  administer  the  decisions  of  the  public,  never  the  public  itself.
               If  the  public  should  decide  on  a  person  to  decide  in  its  place,  then who  is  making  the  decisions?  Who  is  the  sovereign?  
               Representative  democracy  makes  the  public  surrender  their  sovereignty  meaning  their  power  of  decision  to  someone  who  consequently  becomes  their  sovereign  and  a  key  personality  (exposed  to  pressure,  blackmail,  etc.)  who  decides  for  the  nation:  A  very  risky  configuration.
               Representative  democracy  is  falsely  considered  as  “The  people  sovereign”  simply  because  the  representatives  including  the  sovereign  obtain  the  “approval”  of  the  majority  of  the  public  to  decide  in  its  stead  by  promises  they  may  or  may  not  keep.
               Later  they  may  even  take  actions  contradicting  their  promises  in  all  impunity.
               This  “approval”  of  the  people  is  the  factual  surrender  of  their  sovereignty.  How  can  surrendering  their  sovereignty  make  “the  people  sovereign”?
               Does  the  sovereignty  of  the  public  reside  in  the  single  programmed  act  of  surrendering / refusing  its  own  sovereignty?   
 
               In  a  self-sustaining  system  where  the  representatives  are  almost  always  the  same  (career politicians),  it  is  perfectly  natural  that  the  pillars  of  power  created  to  help  and  control  the  sovereign  evolve  into  pillars  of  collusion  with  the  sovereign,  to  empower  and  be  empowered  in  return.
               Expecting  anything  else  is  infantile.
               Representative  democracy  is  almost  as  far  from  Democracy  as  any  regime  admitting  a  sovereign,  since  to  be  elected  any  individual  needs  funding  and  exposure  which  are  only  possible  by  collusion  with  organisms  and/or  “power players”  having  the  means,  but  also  interests  to  satisfy.
               These  interests  may  or  may  not  be  symbiotic  with  that  of  the  public,  and  sometimes  may  even  be  at  its  expense.
               The  principle  of  Democracy  was  created  to  prevent  such  privileges  which  define  the  defeat  of  public  will/interest.
               Representative  democracy  itself  creating  the  things  it  was  supposed  to  prevent  should  make  us  reconsider  the  consequences  of  representation.
 
               Today  the  idea  of  direct  involvement  of  the  public  in  all  affairs  of  the  state  is  called  Direct  Democracy.
               This  is  a  diminishing  term  insinuating  that  Direct  Democracy  is  only  one  vague  version  of  Democracy  among  many  when  it  should  be  the  only  clear  definition  of  Democracy.
               From  here  on  in  this article,  the  stand-alone  term  Democracy  will  designate  Direct  Democracy:  people  sovereign  and  representative  democracy  will  be  designated  by  the  term  Representation.
 
               For  the  moment  Democracy  is  associated  with  referendums.
               Democracy  should  transcend  referendums  and  claim  the  entire  system  of  governance.
               A  system  of  self-governance  that  both  leads  and  follows  our  human  progress  needs  to  be  in  that  same  state  of  progress;  it  needs  to  be  a  process.
               Perhaps  initiating  the  process  of  Democracy  by  referendums  is  one  of  the  valid  options.
               So  if  as  a  first  step  in  the  process  of  Democracy  we  decide  to  restrict  Democracy  to  referendums,  then  we  should  consider  the  fact  that  the  result  of  any  referendum  will  always  be  contingent  on  the  available  information.
               Without  complete  and  untainted  information,  all  thinking  processes  of  the  public  will  be  impaired,  rendering  the  referendum  non- representative.
               “Tainting”  the  available  information  by  “analysis”,  interpretations,  personal  opinions  or  omissions  invalidates  the  result  of  any  referendum.
               To  have  a  valid  referendum,  the  public  needs  a  source  of  untainted,  complete  information,  integrating  the  different  perspectives  of  the  different  constituents  in  the  society.
               Mass/news  media  are  owned  by  private  companies/capitals  hence  the  legitimate  doubt  as  to  the  objective  treatment  of  information  in  domains  involving  the  interests  of  their  owners,
        the  rare  public  channels  still  depend  on  people  elected  by  funding  and  exposure,  which  raises  the  same  issues  as  the  first,
        the  internet  may  be  extremely  useful  but  will  always  be  unreliable.
​
               So  the  public  needs  to  create  a  source  or  sources  of  untainted,   thoroughly  verified,  complete  information  which  will  enable  the  citizens  to  think.
               Some  sort  of  a  ministry  of  information  totally  controlled  by  the  public  may  fit  the  bill.
               This  independent  ministry  should  be  totally  distinct  from  any  apparatus  of  the  state,  be  administered  by  an  often  changing  elected  body,  be  funded  without  strings  attached,  and  have  new  media  at  its  disposal.  It  should  hire  investigative  journalists  who  will  deal  only  in  facts,  and  only  present  information  that  is  complete  and  thoroughly  verified.
               Hosting  all  sorts  of  live  discussions  with  all  sorts  of  people  from  all  walks  of  life  (scientists,  sociologists,  businessmen,  taxi drivers,  butchers,  bakers,  farmers, …)  will  familiarize  the society  with  the  different  perspectives  of  its  different  constituents.  
               The  manner  of  administration  of  this  ministry  should  be  decided  by  the  public;  for  example  by  an  often  changing  administrative  body,  where  each  new  body  would  be  elected  sometime  before  the  end  of  the  mandate  of  the  former,  ensuring  familiarization,  experience  and  continuity.
 
 
               A  complementary  option  to  initiate  Democracy  may  be  voting  for  candidates  to  parliament/congress  who  pledge  to  exclusively  play  the  role  of  messengers  between  the  public  and  the  parliament/congress  by:
         -Bringing  all  the  issues  raised  in  parliament/congress  to  a  platform  where  it  would  be  thoroughly  discussed  by  the  public  and  its  specialists,  and  later  presenting  the  ensuing  vote  of  the  platform  to  the  parliament/congress  as  his  own,
        -Reading  in  parliament/congress  exclusively  the  proposals  of  the  public  formulated  and  voted  on   the platform.
              Of  course  a  certain  delay  should  be  observed  between  the  vote  of  the  parliament/congress  and  the  vote  of  the  public  presented  by  the  “messengers”.
               This  problem  would  be  easily  solved  by  considering  the  result  of  a  vote  in  parliament/congress  as  definitive  only  after  receiving  the  votes  of  these  elected  “messengers”.
 
               This  would  be  a  way  to  graft  Democracy  to  Representation.  Doing  this  will  allow  Democracy  to  run  on  a  small  scale  for  a  certain  time  allowing  the  public  to  acquire  the  experience  and  confidence  needed  while  simultaneously  correcting  and  perfecting  the  projected  mechanisms  of  Democracy.  Later  when  these  mechanisms  become  operational,  Democracy  would  be  both  able  and  ready  to  claim  the  entire  system  of  self-governance  in  one  form  or  another.
 
               Another  complementary  option  to  initiate  Democracy  may  be  the  creation  of  yet  another  ministry  governed  by  the  public  and  for  instance,  called  “ministry  of  Democracy”  which  would  elaborate  the  unavoidable  necessary  systems  and  mechanisms  to  endow  all  willing  members  of  the  nation  with  the  time  and  experience  needed  to  get  familiarized  with  the  perspective  of  decision  making.
 
               All  of  these  options  are  presented  to  initiate  the  continuous  process  of  Democracy.
               Democracy  is  similar  to  an  operating  system  integrating  an  antivirus  program:  It  should  enable,  facilitate  and  monitor  the  operation  of  society,  continuously  adapt  to  new  situations,  enhance  its  performance  and  counter  any  attempt  to  hijack  or  corrupt  the  system.   Like  any  operating  system  or  antivirus  program,  without  continuous  updates  Democracy  will  become  obsolete  very  fast.
 
               It  should  always  be  kept  in  mind  that  all  these  options  will  be  in  their  infancy  at  the  beginning  with  their  fair  share  of  unavoidable  shortcomings  and  errors.      
               Making  the  public  think  that  it  is  currently  ready  for  Democracy  is  fooling  it  into  errors  and  ridicule.
               We  are  not  ready  to  tackle  all  the  issues  of  our  state  at  this  stage,  but  we  can  be  perfectly  ready  very  soon;  a  few  months,  to  a  year  or  two.
 
               Perhaps  instead  of  grafting  Democracy  to  Representation,  some  may prefer  to  create  on  a  platform  some  sort  of  a  popular  parliament  or  congress  parallel  to  our  actual  one  constituted  by  all  willing  citizens.
               This  popular  parliament  would  participate  in  legislation  by  a  proportional  representation  determined  by  the  ratio  of  those  who  prefer  to  represent  themselves  to  those  who  prefer  to  be  represented  by  representatives.
 
               We  should  consider  and  perhaps  test  all  our  options,  maybe  even  simultaneously.
 
 
               There  is  an  understandable  non-issue  with  Democracy  that  upsets  the  economically  privileged  constituents  of  a  society.  They  fear  that  if  Democracy  is  instated,  the  poor  will  rob  them  of  their  wealth.
                In  my  view,  it  is  Democracy  that  will  save  their  wealth  for  them.
 
               Most  (perhaps all)  countries  governed  by  Representation  are  indebted.  The  people  did  not  decide  to  contract  debt,  their  “key”  representatives  did.
               Currently,  representatives  are  selling  (called  privatizing)  everything  of  value  in  their  nations  and  sometimes  even  indirectly  taxing  the  poor  just  to  pay  only  a  part  of  the  interests  on  the  debt  of  their  making.
               The  cries  of  the  impoverished  will  be  drowned  by  the  arrogance  of  the  yet  non-impoverished  in  the  name  of  order/good  governance,  considering  the  impoverished  as  being  responsible  for  their  situation.
               Order/disorder  is  a  consequence,  not  a  cause.
               Treating  a  cause  before  it  creates  consequences  is  the  spirit  of  Democracy.
               Letting  a  non- treated  cause  inescapably  create  consequences  and  then  silencing  these  consequences  is  the  spirit  of  tyranny.
 
               Eventually  the  impoverished  will  have  nothing  more  to  give.
               The  impoverishment  will  move  up  and  tax  the  next  level  of  society,  and  so  on.
               This  situation  will  continue  as  long  as  we  continue  with  representation.
               The  indebted  country  will  sell  its  national  treasures  and  everything  of  value.
               Crash  after  crash  the  money  in  banks  will  be  less  and  less  accessible.
               Crash  after  crash  investments  will  be  lost  for  individuals  and  small  banks.
               Crash  after  crash  the  big  banks  will  absorb  all  the  investments  along  with  the  small  banks.
 
               Do  the  economically  privileged  think  that  they  risk  nothing,  or  they  risk  nothing  for  the  time  being?
               The  answer  should  make  them  see  that  eventually  either  the  entire  society  wins  together,  or  falls  as  alienated  parts.
               And  if  we  think  “global”,  then  either  the  entire  human  society  wins  together,  or  falls  as  alienated  parts.
 
               Representation  can  only  continue  doing  what  it  does:  tax  and  sell  anything  belonging  to  the  nation  that  has  value  or  can  generate  profit.
               Only  Democracy  allows  us  to  deal  with  the  debt  logically,  hence  save  everybody,  including  the  economically  “privileged”.
               On  the  long  run,  Democracy  is  for  the  benefit  of  all  the  constituents  of  society,  and  “detrimental”  only  to  global  finance  and  its  ambitions  of  unlimited  profit  which  serves  no  vital  need,  just  throws  the  rest  of  humanity  overboard  in  an  ocean  of  scarcity  and  misery  while  causing  an  irreversible,  catastrophic  ecologic/environmental  failure.
 
                A  warning:
               The  nation(s)  which  tries  to  initiate  a  process  to  extricate  from  this  system  of  farming  humanity  by  representation,  debt  and  eventually  poverty  will  most  probably  suffer  the  wrath  of  global  finance  which  may  go  to  extreme  lengths  in  stopping  the  process,  because  Representation  has  always  allowed  foreign/global  actors  to  freely  Lobby/pilot  our  “key”  representatives  to  their  own  interests  under  the  cover  of  “democratic  legitimacy”.
               We  should  remember  that  almost  all  nations  which  were  not  yet  absorbed  in  this  system  of  representation,  debt  and  eventually  poverty   were  textbook  tyrannies.
               But  before  rightfully  dismissing  and  condemning  tyranny  like  any  normal,  self-respecting  human  being,  the  following  facts  deserve  some  consideration:
       1 - Knowing  all  too  well  the  fact  that  an  educated  public  is  harder  to  govern,  strangely  most  of  these  tyrannies  had  a  free  education  system  including  free  universities  alongside  the  private.
       2 – Knowing  all  too  well  the  fact  that  a  well  fed,  well  healed  people  will  always  think  of  ways  to  make  their  lives  still  better  hence  becoming  a  danger  to  the  tyrant,  most  of  these  tyrannies  had  free  healthcare  and  retirement  systems.
               Of  course  we  are  always  relieved  to  see  any  tyranny  go,  but  in  the  painful  absence  of  Democracy  where  the  people  would  submit  to  no  rule  but  their  own,  I  am  no  longer  sure  that  submission  to  representation,  debt  and  eventually  poverty  in  a  globalized  world  with  globalized,  profit  oriented,  domineering  foreign  economic  rule  is  better  than  submission  to  a  non-globalized  native  tyrant.
               Naturally  these  nations  suffered  civil  wars,  went  bankrupt,  lost  all  their  social  guarantees  and  were  obliged  to  accept  being  “helped”  and  “invigorated”  by  debt,  and  have  now  joined  the  ranks  of  the  modern,  free,  representatively  democratic,  “privatized”,  invigorated  and  indebted  nations.
 
               Democracy  is  an  open  process  of  civility  which  will  secure  the  extension  of  the  economic  middle  class  by  elaborating  a  corresponding  economic/ecologic/financial model.
               In  Democracy,  we  even  need  not  concern  ourselves  with  non-provable  “conspiracy”  issues  or  any  issue  really;  Democracy  will  shed  abundant  light  on  anything  and  everything  and  correct  all  and  every  imbalance  in  our  societies.
 
               Democracy  is  not  only  our  best  bet,
               It  is  our  only  bet.
 
               The  political/economic/ecologic  situation  is  so  far  gone  that  nothing  can  be  accomplished  by  “reasonable”,  “responsible”,  progressive  half  measures  and  patches.
               A  massive,  rational  hence  inherently  pacific  yet  unstoppable  civic  insurrection/revolution  is  needed.
 
               To  take  back  the  control  of  our  lives  and  to  preserve  all  life  on  our  planet  we  need  to  unleash  our  true  might;
               We  need  to  unleash  Democracy. 



2 Comments

    BLOG

    Archives

    July 2019
    June 2019

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly
  • Home
  • About
    • About The Book
    • Contact
  • Read sections
  • Blog
  • Poll
  • Order The Book
    • Paperback Edition and ebook Kindle in Europe >
      • Amazon France
      • Amazon Germany
      • Amazon Italy
      • Amazon Spain
      • Amazon UK
    • ebook edition Kindle >
      • Kindle Australia
      • Kindle Brasil
      • Kindle Canada
      • Kindle India
      • Kindle Japan
      • Kindle Mexico
      • Kindle Netherlands
      • Kindle United States