A Theoretical Political Physicist Reverses Our Polarity With A Better Democracy Card Schtick
.
I have read a number of books on quantum physics. Nothing terribly, mathematical-equation heavy so I can only give you a rough outline of the physics. However, the history of how the scientists got to the next stage of advances in the quantum realm is enlightening all on its own.
.
Breakthroughs were often rejected by the dinosaurs. At other times the ah-ha moments never came, it was a research paper a researcher found that was written by someone else, years before. Not many people had heard about it, let alone read, and promoted it, so the idea languished, as the paper collected dust, until it was rediscovered. In politics it is a lot easier to come up with at least plausible ideas, but tougher to get through all the rumbling and wrestling. Workable ideas may become obsolete before anyone notices them.
.
The process that matured over a number of years into my comprehensive democracy enhancer, began as a smaller nationwide jobs project, and became an integral element, not a solitary one. Years into the jobs element, an ah-ha momentoccurred that solidified my belief in it, enlarged the project scope beyond jobs, and gave me a much better understanding of its potential and value. It happened while I was playing a very simple game. Something I play almost every night to calm my mind before I sink into the pillow.
.
It could be played on my phone, but I like the tactile experience. The playing of it has a building-something-real feel. That game is solitaire.
.
A whole deck of cards is used except for Jokers. Seven stacks of cards are dealt out left to right, first one is face up, the other six down, return left to 2nd stack, place one face up, now one card face down on the other five… continue pattern until the seventh stack has six down with one face up. A total of 28 cards are now on the table. Then flip every 3rd card in the remaining 24 card deck. Only play the face up cards if they match in an alternating black-red pattern, and by card number to face up cards, in up to seven stacks. Any Ace goes face up, behind the seven stacks, with those cards stacked in the same suit in value/number order…. Get the visual idea here, if you desire. Otherwise, continue….
.
Anyway, like about 80% to 95% of the time, you cannot finish stacking up the four piles, which requires all four Aces to be stacked with another 12 cards in its suit. One of the most frustrating endings is when only one or two cards remain in your hand, or face down on the table. Just the other day I had a King and Queen in my hand, with the Queen first when flipped face up. That meant I could not proceed, with ONLY TWO f’ing cards remaining!
.
An Ah-Ha Moment.
A few years ago when I had my ah-ha moment, the foiler of one of my wins could have been something similar. Although it would have been only a part of over an hour of unsuccessfully finishing a game. That night I was constantly reminded of a problem I had noticed most every time I played over the years, but when you win every so often, the positive vibes quickly, and thankfully, push away that negative losing experience.
.
As I viscerally took notice of the obstacles in my way, time after time without a reprieve that ah-ha night. My mind locked onto the every day actual, and seemingly, intractable problems and dilemmas life presents us with. What happens when you can see the solution, yet you are not allowed to solve it? I knew that if I could get to the King, I could finish the game. The solution was right there, but unavailable to me. The rules did not allow me to access it. Only turning over three cards at a time was how I played it. Argh! There was nothing I could do.
.
That is what I call a stalemate. Something I abhor, especially when it is me playing a game by myself, or when I see society stalling for decades, or longer, on a very important matter. Breaking the rules only gets you so far. And changing the rules is very difficult as the underdog, or without the strong, and unwavering, long term support of a majority. In solitaire someone can cheat (a.k.a. change the rules in the middle of the game), without much ramification, but any win, as insignificant as a win is, makes the win totally worthless, and unfulfilling.
.
In the real world, people are more likely to pursue cheating or corruption when something big can be accomplished without too much risk. When it comes to societal matters, any cheating will usually have blowback that risks too much. That said, our current political structure is susceptible to cheating, and other connivances. Status quo politicians that cheat, sandbag, and obstruct the system have almost zero immediate blowback. So far, the long term blowback we are receiving is mostly due to one party’s denial strategy, and senatorial blocking.
.
Since cheating is not in our plans, we are left with an intractable problem. It is intractable because the same status quo has enough power to hold its ground for many decades, if not longer. The party that is obstructing and cheating has much of the immediate, and long term responsibility for our predicament. However the larger society, white people for the most part, whether Republican or Democrat, place their grandfathered-in privilege in the way of all the long tail changes, needed by everyone without white privilege, especially those without consistently fattened wallets. That being said, many poor whites are in a downward spiral too.
.
Flipping cards in solitaire is easier by many orders of magnitude than changing society. But we also know what things need changing to make our society better. Equalized and improved educational resources, and a consistent quality of teaching, higher paying jobs, end of race, gender, disability, and age discrimination, universal healthcare, much less violence by the state, and non-state violence, fewer arrests, and prisoners, cleaner water, air, soil, and energy.
.
All of those societal elements are not lagging, or actively harming Americans due to a lack of good ideas. Good ideas are plentiful, but strategies to implement them have always been hamstrung by a reluctant, slow moving, status quo, even malicious majority. Another reason is our historical penchant for Sir Edmund Burke’s form of muddled change: a.k.a. quantum retrogression. Burke’s political philosophy is denoted by an interminable amount of waiting for some perfect inflection point in the future of never, or some convoluted justification of snail trail incrementalism as the best path sideways.
.
The Probabilities, Possibilities, And Implausibilities.
What IS possible if we cannot flip to the card we need, and finish the game? It only happens because the status quo blocks our path with quicksand rules, and never-leading-anywhere cheating. Playing their same old game is going to get us the same old results. Every time we lose the old political game, many people are hurt, damaged for life, die, or lose their way forever. We get so close; it is right there! And still do not get to the other, better side of things:
.
Some political examples: Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland held hostage by one person, Mitch McConnell. Clinton Losing To Trump. Traitor Trump salvaging his political office holding potential.
.
Imagine having just one of those losses reversed. Only ten senators raising their hands would have changed the results in Trump’s recent Senate trial. While we saw again how cowardly Republican senators are, the fact that any votes went Trump’s way shows how messed up a president would need to be to get the proper vote out of Republicans. Rather than thinking about the politics surrounding voting, consider the small number of votes that changed the outcome. Like Clinton’s loss to Trump, the relatively small numbers, which was about 80,000 votes in 3 states, or by a 0.0321% margin.
.
While Trumplicans would not agree, the three example losses were bad for our country. However, if one side is more correct than the other, why do such close votes occur? And if Democrats had the best reasoning or candidate, why did Democrats lose those votes? The closeness of Electoral College, state by state, skewed voting in the presidential elections, which occurred in the Biden-Harris win as well, are divined by party politics. Without ranked voting, or a similar electorate re-centering process, the two-party system, as it is bent, now nearly guarantees such divisive wins or losses, for one party or the other.
.
I am not here to argue ranked voting or other tweaks because they merely turn the argument, and problems in another direction. More immediately, those tweaks are unlikely to happen as imagined because of the two-party system structure. That is the major reason I call them tweaks; getting them implemented relies on the same main conundrum undergirding my essay. We must change the system to get those system changes. It is that paradoxical problem we are stuck with.
.
The Electoral College nearly threw the U.S. election into even more turmoil than we saw with the January 6th insurrection and aftermath, as the College was only 44,000 votes in three states away from creating a tie. How can such a terrible person nearly become president again? I may have called that tie outcome, if it had occurred, a conspiracy if I had not been so vocal in complaining, and mocking the Trumplicans, and their habit of fabricating a crazy, new conspiracy every day.
.
Without going into every detail of why our system is messed up, events like our Electoral College debacles in 2000, and 2016, and near debacle this past year via a tie vote, and the January 6th insurrection, make tweaks to our system very problematic, and long-term projects (more than a decade) if not unlikely. Worse yet, our tweaking efforts could be reversed by their Supreme Court, or after losing many seats in a congressional term flipped by the GOP.
.
There is another way we may extricate ourselves out of this paradoxical predicament that does not require playing within the two-party system. That would be the changing demographics. As more people of color change the overall complexion of the nation, we may see enough of a percentage change in the size of the Democratic Party compared to the number of additional Republican voters. Such a positive addition of voters for Democrats could then greatly improve our political situation.
.
If I made that kind of demographic wave analogous to my solitaire theme, it could be like adding a different card viewing rotation. For example, alternating between flipping three cards, and flipping two cards. That improvement, as in demographic changes, would not assure Democrats of a win every time, but the odds would swing in our favor overall. The problem with this concept is that people of color are not a monolith, and are more likely to follow their personality style rather than align with Democrats consistently as most Black Americans do.
.
Note that I am using liberal and conservative personality traits as a catchall for many aspects of a person’s decision making. I could get deeper in the weeds to describe the science around how we make political decisions, but since demographic changes are not a significant part of my premise, I wanted to moved passed it fairly quickly. Yet still noting that expected demographic changes could possibly bring about positive change; however, it is too risky to place a lot of confidence there.
.
Black Americans with long ancestral ties to American history, and are very cognizant of our terrible record on civil rights, more often vote against their conservative personality traits; over 80% identify as Democrats. Southern whites, and their religious affiliations also trap many with liberal traits in their conservative (not very) funhouse mirror. Basically, no matter how the demographics increase via the persons of color direction from immigration, or non-deep African American heritage, conservatism could hold its place in American politics for the foreseeable future. That is my theory at least.
.
Therefore, I see the two-party system as the biggest stumbling block to getting the major things accomplished, noted in the 13th paragraph. Demographic changes, and tweaks in the system will not, and cannot accomplish what we want, for a couple decades, many generations, or ever. While some tweaks may get done, and positive demographic changes may occur, the results will be as underwhelming as most changes have been since 1970. Additionally, every win for Democrats since 2010 is considered by Republicans as a long term loss, every battle will be trench warfare.
.
Tweaking Is Insufficient.
This means we must level the two-party system not just tweak it. Since rushing the formidable ramparts of a deeply anchored structure, and toppling it, is unlikely to work, as the insurrectionists demonstrated in full, fools-rush-in folly on January 6th, another way is required. The two-party system may be the best way to play politics, but it is not the way to solve societal problems. What we have been doing for too long is coming up with a better way to do politics. What if we are doing politics the best way possible? Agreeing with that premise helped me solve the intractable solitaire premise.
.
Are we actually doing politics the best way possible? Assuredly not. From voter suppression to senatorial obstruction, there are a slew of things needing improvement. That however gets us back to my original paradox, or our catch-22, why are we not doing it the best way possible? The word “possible” is the key to better understanding the paradox, and helped me overcome the catch-22. Unless you agree that we are doing politics as good as we are able to, you will get stuck in this inescapable loop: we cannot improve politics until we improve politics.
.
This is where my understanding of historical changes in the theory of quantum physics, and solitaire meet up. People will not change until they overcome their prejudices. This includes all kinds of prejudices from race and gender to scientific and political. From believing in creationism to agreeing that evolution is correct. Making such a change is extremely difficult after spending decades agreeing with the other side.
.
It is about like getting your mind around The Holographic Principle, that the 3-dimensional universe we experience is actually a hologram, an image of reality coded on a distant 2-dimensional surface. Realize that “distant 2D surface” stands for bits of information on the boundaries of the universe.
Theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind explained how he got to understand the workings of black holes,which included The Holographic Principle, an idea he “proved” with String Theory, and how he finally got Stephen Hawking to agree with his theory after two decades of challenging Hawking’s perspective.
.
The problem with coming around to understand something you believed in for decades is wrong can be a long, and confusing process. One of the only ways it happens faster is in a very emotionally charged situation, someone close dying without any warnings, nearly dying yourself, other losses and calamities. Getting your head around quantum physics often starts with feeling your head lift from your body, as it spins around uncontrollably but slowly in a fog, or it tumbles all by itself slowly down a pillow mountain, flopping every which way as bees buzz in your ears. Are you dizzy and dumbstruck yet?
.
How is it even possible to think we are a hologram, let alone understand it? You either give in to the confusion, and make it work, or you reject it, and fight against it. Luckily, we can work on both concepts simultaneously. Staying involved in our current political system, while making as many changes as possible within it, as we achieve more societal improvements from the outside as well. Of course, Americans have been making positive changes from the outside in various ways already. The problem is many changes also require the politics to conform so the greatest number of Americans can experience those improvements.
.
After many years of playing solitaire, you will likely start noticing foreboding patterns in most games before half the cards are turned over. This kind of pattern usually means the game will not end with a win. It is very frustrating to notice this fact any earlier, since minutes ago you dealt out 28 cards, maybe played others, and you may need to gather each one up, and deal again! Playing digitally you avoid this part. But as I said, I like the tactile feel. Shuffling and dealing also gives me a few moments to gloat over my recent win, if it was recent, which it likely wasn’t. You see the intractable problem heading your way, yet you butt heads with it anyway, again and again.
.
Though few societal problems are ever completely intractable, meaning there may be small wins, you know the deck is stacked against you to more completely solve the larger problem. In solitaire, you will solve it, but you never know when that will be, and wins will be short lived, because you get focused on winning the next one. How are these intractable problem dilemmas overcome? I suggest doing a thought experiment as Leonard Susskind did, and Albert Einstein was famous for.
.
First, you must put yourself in complete control, considering that every other idea is wrong. While that may sound egotistical, it frees you up from the prejudices that have locked you into a limited way of thinking.
.
Second, realize you could be wrong about anything you come up with in this experiment. Use that skeptical part of your brain to scrutinize and shred anything that does not stand up to a rigorous logic. Of course, let others critique it. Remember it is often painful to think and do differently, whether you are right or wrong.
.
Finally, anything is feasible as long as it works. Every rule can be broken. Everyone’s ox can be gored. No old strategy is safe from being upended. All cherished shibboleths can be eviscerated. Any structure can be inverted. Anyone’s bubble may be burst.
.
With those ideas in place, rules with astronomically wide boundaries, we have wiped the slate clean. The only parameters are the following. There is a game called solitaire, but no one has provided guidelines for playing. Black holes are real, but no one yet has given them satisfactory rules. Cheating is not allowed; only being wrong can hold us back. Traveling faster than the speed of light is not possible. Creating a game no one will want to play is the only way it could go wrong. Coming up with the rules a black hole must follow that no scientist can ever replicate will never improve science.
.
Hawking and Susskind were arguing about what happens to (bits of) information around a black hole. The earth and our bodies would turn into bits of information near a black hole. If any information is lost forever, the 2nd rule of thermodynamics is broken. If true, the universe would collapse almost instantly. Hawking did not seem to be concerned about the loss of information. Susskind was very much on the opposite side, information is never lost, only transferred, or reconfigured.
.
The Realities of Change.
I will try not to go any deeper into quantum physics here. Just remember that change is difficult. When Stephen Hawking can barely admit he was wrong, expecting politicians to admit they are on the wrong track is ludicrous. Changing the direction of the political party system will be near impossible without a much stronger outside force pushing it to change. The two-party system is near a political black hole horizon. Its no-go-to-new-legislation protection system is nearly invulnerable, completely enabling its status quo, or worse flow.
.
The pushback is solidified because Republicans have nothing to gain by changing. From their current perspective, our loss is the Republicans only gain. Throwing more into that black hole without any consistently positive data on its effect makes no sense. Democrats who try to appease Republicans in the current environment, while laudable at some points in our history, is very problematic today. In a more perfect system, centrism could have beneficial potential. However, for example, when inequality is so dramatic, and widening, compromise is almost always a loss for the poorest Americans, and much of the working class.
.
Democrats can speed up the whack-a-mole process, but why did we let the Republicans build the damn machine in the first place? Whacking moles faster will never improve the Republican game. Playing solitaire more rapidly will not prevent big losses. We cannot improve while Republicans are also tearing down. Catching up will never occur in a political stalemate, where the other party makes up the game, let alone will great leaps be made. We not only need to win our games of solitaire more than once in awhile, it must be done consistently for at least a couple decades just to gain back what we lost in the last four decades. That is why Democratic Party solitaire can no longer stand or fight alone.
.
Solitaire as it is played in the political realm, as a lone party against another lone party, has ceased to be the only main option. Republicans have chosen the simplest way around their predicament, cheating the system. Since they have disrupted the two-party system in this way, our only effective response is to dramatically change how the game is played.
.
Externally, there have been some recent major changes from Super PACs to other more clandestine dark money elements initiated by Citizens United. This is helps the Republican’s game, part of their cheating apparatus. Yet Democrats also jumped into this fray. While we likely had to follow along, at best we only keep up, as we simultaneously make two-party politics more corrupt. Such Faustian bargains made Trump possible. Future historians will mostly see us as complicit, not fighting against the tide of corruption, and Democratic politicians seeming to benefit from it in many ways.
.
Though posterity is not what we are worried about here, shaming Trumplicans that they should realize how bad their actions, or inactions will look in the future, is unfortunately hypocritical since the sweep of history, as a general future memory, always seems to miss the nuances of complicity. As with Nero, when he was fiddling, everybody else was merely succumming.
.
That said, the solution is to not follow their lead into a further corrupting of the two-party system. A third party may be the best way to go if a third party was developed, but due to such a construction’s continued failure to materialize a consistent voter total of over 5%, we are again left with the two-party system doing as much as it is capable of. Again, the caveat includes there being many improvements or tweaks needed and possible, just not attainable soon, or within a decade or more for the fixes to be achieved, let alone time for them to have the desired effect.
.
Therefore, moving to a new game (a.k.a. system) is essential. However, this system interacts with the two-party system from a higher plane, and with greater strength at its base, than anything ever devised before. At any failure. point in the process, the system flags it, ramps up the value of it, and demands from the two-party system actual results, never giving into pressure to back off.
.
This watchdog element and opposition effort points out the problems with the status quo system, and provides eviscerating rationale to make our changes, and presents cost effective options a super-majority of Americans will demand with one loud voice. This overwhelming process will remove the obstacles that prevent a successful end to their game of hide the (ball) problem card in solitaire (committee). Otherwise the status quo system will allow the new system to take over the full management of the problems it refuses to solve, and implement proper solutions.
.
The insurrectionists did not succeed in their attack on the ramparts. Yet they did do more than they should have. Ironically that result is comparable to what Democrats have not done. Much of our rationale and fury is swallowed up by the black hole of D.C. politics. When Democrats storm the ramparts with reason and compassion for others, we are repulsed by mere parlor tricks and procedural pricks.
.
The Politcal Black Hole Dilemma.
The silence from Republicans on societal solutions and politicians obeying the law has been especially quiet in the last four years with 2020, and the first six weeks of 2021, being the worst on record. Actually taking a dive many leagues into despicable depths of disgrace, and distressing deaths of those dear to us. We cannot relive such indescribable and indefensible injustices.
.
Once you are beyond the event horizon of a black hole, you could only escape if you traveled faster than the speed of light. Since it is not possible, to see anything, and be able to report what you saw back to earth, space travelers must avoid getting too close. Both observers have different interpretations on how things look from their frame of reference. It is nearly impossible to bring them together in a political physics sense. Although one-party’s viewpoint is much more corrupted than the other, positive polarity work can be done to reconnect both sides to an effective degree of cooperation. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party, as a purely political entity, cannot achieve escape velocity on its own.
.
In their defense, no matter what Democrats did, they were going to be pulled towards a black hole. Two-party politics could also be compared to two people with not very compatible personalities who are strapped into one space parachute. Both can take control, but if they do not work together, the results will be disastrous. The longer the descent lasts, the more miscalculations there are, and the more panic has a chance to set in. Returning to the spaceship is possible, just not very likely. After 200 plus years, both parties are barely strapped in, and Republicans are upside down.
.
Some other force must be injected into the mix. Adding velocity to the two-party system, if it was possible, would be mostly wasted on pushing away from Republican corruption, and corruption from the passage of time during descent. Lowering a lifeline towards the horizon would make it possible to slow down their approach to the black hole, to reconfigure the space parachute, and greatly extend the descent to accomplish more, better things. Completely repairing and relaunching the space parachute may be possible, but that requires significant external energy to successfully disable external, and internal forces as well as inertia. Although nothing lasts forever, an effective reboot of the chute could extend the life of our democracy.
.
Leveling up the two-party system requires a structure that competes with the forces aligned with Republicans, billionaires, especially those with a libertarian bent, and conservative christians, particularly evangelical nationalists. As tightly woven into the Republican party as they are, puts Democrats at a major disadvantage. The religious rights’ perennial issues are fewer, more anciently anchored, and are locked with simplistic low taxes mantra, and a high percentage of their constituents are easily influenced by socialism fear mongering. Their succinct grouping of issues provides a more potent punch than a wider, more nebulous, or not as readily understood, and an expanding number, of progressive and liberal concerns.
.
Low taxes and religion have an immediate saliency for Americans that investments in the poor and helping the other in society via government do not have. Some constituents want this, or others need that, still others require something else, is harder to get through the meat grinder of two-party politics. As with quantum physics, and the speed of light, there are still rules you cannot escape. Competing with simplistic ideas as well as clan allegiances is a ruling authority that even well-reasoned arguments do not usually overcome. The senate votes to twice acquit Trump are a wretched reminder of that axiom.
.
A new system must transcend this chasm, drawing together various structures Republicans would never consider, or be able to pull off. Bringing the power of We The People into a massively flexible and far reaching quasi-governmental direct democratic, action force. Copying the basic properties of the public-private partnership model, and faith based organizations that receive federal funds. As with billionaires, and religious groups, the system would not be a political organization, but work as a non-profit with tentacles reaching into the government in various ways, and conversely extricating services from, and managing, local, state, and federal agencies.
.
Additionally, both federal agencies and political parties are extra-constitutional entities. The new system fits into the same constitutional in between world.
.
System Development.
There are some hard and fast rules we must follow to develop the system, and support the system as its responsibilities expand, and transition into government services maintenance. Rules similar to not being able to travel faster than the speed of light. They are, consider and integrate prejudices, perspectives, and policy changes desired, shrink the liberal and conservative personality divide, and realize that 100% conversion is not possible.
.
The main theme will revolve around workers and citizens. Workers are chosen for two integral reasons. The most obvious is jobs, which are very important to almost every family in America. Second, a percentage of workers are not citizens*. Citizens provide the civic clout required to build an effective countervailing force. Continually improving their knowledge, and strengthening their power will go a long way to solidifying the long term capacity of the system, and participants to outmaneuver opponents. Citizens who override our hyper-consumerism focus to create better communities.
.
*Even immigration is seamlessly managed using the system architecture, with almost no arrests, detentions, or deportations.
.
The integral element I discussed earlier, a precursor of the system, is also a connective element. The Jobs Development Platform provides every worker with a powerful focal point. There is nothing this platform cannot do for them in respect to finding the best job for their skills. Its massive database and facilitation technology makes instantaneous job selection possible. In this reconfigured environment, job applicants choose their job and employer, if their skills match the job description, and are verified by the system. Thus eliminating all unethical and illegal discrimination in hiring.
.
If additional training or education is needed, the platform facilitates that automatically, mostly through current educative providers. As the person receives that skill and knowledge development, the job is often held for them, depending on transition time. Otherwise, a similar job will be acquired for them, or the applicant can choose other options, depending on their preferences and skills.
.
The civic element is a one door concept. Everybody enters one door, completes one short questionnaire, then is helped at every stage depending on their needs. Each worker and citizen is given the resources needed to become as active in the civic arena as possible. Their wishes, another questionnaire, citizen status, knowledge, and civic experience elicit various ways they can get more involved in the system structure, and externally. Non-partisan training in those areas is provided to make the most of their civic participation and work.
.
While positive change making is the priority of the system, the internal goings on are non-party specific. It is a policy advocacy and think tank without being a partisan shop of some kind. Conservatives will perceive it as such, but those directly involved will not. The pressure will be put on the billionaire bullies, and outside, outsized influences not on the political or election processes per see. Of course, the general public will encounter significant persuasive arguments within the system, and externally to appreciate the value of our policy proposals.
.
The goal is to achieve a minimum 60% of American adults as participants in the system. Anyone can be a participant, but it is a flat structure from the standpoint of its direct democracy decision making. Money or other influence will not have any additional power to engineer counter decisions. Every vote is anonymous, and every representative position is randomized. Since the system is separate from state or federal political influence, and the 60% minimum participation provides a power base without comparable opposition, it will be the sole owner of this space. The mega-wealthy and ultra conservative cannot piece together such a wide open platform of value.
.
The most strident conservatives will avoid this kind of environment. Yet, there are areas where the system structure can chip away at those with a hint of centrism. A decent drift of independent conservative Americans towards the system, could push the total system numbers to 70%, maybe higher. Besides the jobs guarantee portion of the system, it provides other draws.
.
Due to properties inherent in the overall system technology, certain competing shibboleths are nullified including socialism versus capitalism, collective versus individualistic, workers versus business, government taxes versus spending, deep state versus fourth estate, and various other adversarial issues are flattened to near shadows of their previous selves. Government as the bad actor is converted to: if you do not participate in this endeavor, blame only yourself for bad government.
.
Socialism and capitalism have long been the yin and yang of politics. The system makes both philosophies insignificant. The worry about a socialistic system is removed with direct democracy. Capitalism is tamed by the rule of the people, who should be the most powerful, not the moneyed, the selfish, and the fearful. Workers and business are united because the Jobs Development Platform also powerfully streamlines new business startups, and its remarkably efficient placement of the best workers into the right companies is an immense 21st century improvement.
.
The system can accommodate the individual and collective action. As long as the actions are positive, supporting individual rights, and the greater good, there will be no problems. Someone may want to be involved in a watchdog effort. For instance, researching either political party, or both, for legislation inaccuracies, improper activities in office, or malfeasance of any kind. As long as the research follows the overall system guidelines that determine what is fair game and what is not, they have many new tools to accomplish their task.
.
Government waste/spending, taxes as well as the deep state, and fourth estate all fall under the considerable watchdog capabilities of the system. For example, the fourth estate can fully utilize the system, and other participants can use the system to double check the fourth estate.
.
Freedom and liberty are both our responsibility. The system puts you on the cutting edge of making those ideas as valid as possible. Again, these elements may not assuage the last 15% to 30% of Americans on the conservative right, but everyone else will see significant value in being directly involved.
.
The concepts above, as well as others not considered in this essay, all help to integrate our (non-harmful) prejudices, perspectives, and policy changes desired by a large percentage of Americans. The approach of the system also shrinks the liberal and conservative personality divide. And though 100% conversion is not possible, many of the currently divided can be brought in under its tent.
.
NOTE: the system is made up of people; the technology helps bring together the nation, allowing us to coordinate and facilitate the solutions We The People design utilizing the amazing and comprehensive tools of a system we create, update continually, own, and manage.
.
Conclusion.
There are many other elements of the We The People System I have not written about here. That said, every blank I have filled comes from ideas I developed, or I have heard about over the last ten years. For example, greatly expanding, and facilitating in a 21st century manner, the green economy is one of the areas I have written about. That is linked to the Jobs Development Platform, and comprehensive logistical strategies for preventing deaths and damage due to, and recovering from, massive hurricanes, freak snowstorms, wildfires, and the like.
.
I filled in as many blanks as possible to make it more understandable and realistic. Yet, in the end, this cannot be my project alone, otherwise few people will commit to the work that is needed to actually make it a real thing. That requires a national movement. Showing people how they can get involved. And what it will mean to them when they do.
.
By Richard The Chwalek
.
As an aside, we have the money to do all these things noted above and in paragraph 13: Read Stephanie Kelton’s book, The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory, and the Birth of the People’s Economy. She describes what MMT is all about, and how we are not limited to tax collections to guarantee funding for societal problems. Here is a video scene she references in the book with Alan Greenspan and Paul Ryan that clarifies her point, and catches Ryan totally off guard. Also a short article that explains some of it. While this is a tremendous tweak, she was unable to get Democrats in Congress to align with it, after her advisory stint in 2015.
.
Susskind, from 2008, does not get the last word on black holes. A couple more recent ideas: 2019 and 2020.
Comments
Post a Comment