Forum Post: Direct Democracy Candidate
Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 19, 2011, 12:02 a.m. EST by hidden
(430)
from Los Angeles, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
This is an idea how to elect direct democracy in representative democracy
We need:
- Create a direct democracy on-line voting platform.
- Find an articulate and dedicated person that would meet the requirements for the presidency.
- Nominate him.
- Let him publicly sign a document that states something similar to the following.
- Ensure the news coverage.
I, {name} agree to execute the order of the direct democracy and nothing else. Any attempt to execute any other order or to interfere with the defined operation of the platform directly or indirectly would be considered a violation of the contract and lead to my disqualification as a president.
The voting platform
- There should be an agency that anonymously assigns each citizen a unique number(distinct from SSN for privacy concern) and a password to ensure that a voter is a real person.
- The platform should be open source.
- Each person should be able to post their own proposal.
- Each person should be able to post their revision of each proposal.
- There should be two columns of comments, one in support and one in critique.
- Each person should be able to post their comment in one or both of the columns.
- Each person should not be able to vote directly for or against a particular proposal, but instead subscribe to the comment(s) in ether support or critique of each proposal.
- The comments and the proposals should be sorted in order of number of subscribers. The top ones would be the ones with the most subscribes, therefore the most relevant and/or important, so people would be able to make an informative decision.
- Each comment should also be considered a forum topic and be discussed in place if so needed.
- Each person should be able to see all the voter numbers subscribed to each comment or all the voter numbers in each column. The is to ensure that your vote is not forged.
- Each person should be able to see a list of all votes and all proposals associated with each voter number.
- Each time a new proposal is posted, a certain number of random voters should be notified to contribute their vote, decline of which will notify another random person.
- When the total number of voters in both columns if a proposal reach critical number, a global notification should be triggered to notify the rest of the population to contribute their vote.
- Voting should be completely voluntary.
The president's role would be to publicly announce the winning proposals and sign relevant papers.
Great ideas and solutions, but we need to head down a path that is the direct opposite of what the 1% is planning. They planned this financial crisis to offer their solution and keep themselves in power.
In order to avoid current and future manipulations, we need to move away from ALL systems that allow room for ANY corrupt hi-jacking. Check this out: http://www.unitinghumans.com/2011/10/differences-between-new-world-order.html
P.S. In this article; new world order = the 1%
Good idea to have all the distinctions listed in one place, some people are so scared, they can't even recognize the difference :)
Anyway, let's say it's a backup plan. The plane that can be executed in parallel.
There are computer geeks and engineers that have been working on this. Their project is called the V2 (internet version 2) that may interest you. - http://osixs.org/V2_Menu_V2.aspx
They've also been working on a plan to couple the V2 to a Direct Democracy since 2006: http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx Cheers!
Is there any real information on it, I mean, besides the promotional material that doesn't carry any valuable information on how exactly would it help with the platform?
osixs.org doesn't look trustworthy, there is no any comprehensive solution, no information on what is wrong. They say the web is dying. The web is almost dead, this is not web, this web-site is not web, most of web-sites are not web, they are web 2.0
This image they presented in "wired magazine" is very misleading! The web traffic is not shrinking, the p2p traffic is not shrinking, the scale is shrinking. What an idiot is representing Internet traffic on percent scale? The amount of data passed trough ISPs is trough the roof, they even want to install new transmission lines because it's all time high. They're all growing.
What promotional material? Of all the pages at there site; I've found one book for sale. And it's not on every page - you have to dig for it. What they are promoting is ideas.
Doesn't 'look' trustworthy? I find it hard to prejudge them on their 'looks". Their ideas and message is what inspires me. They've also been around since 2006 - so they didn't just pop out of nowhere.
"no any comprehensive solution" - Each one of these links represent another step in their detailed plan -
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_commonsense.aspx
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_billofrights.aspx
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Intro_DT.aspx
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Declaration.aspx
http://osixs.org/Rev2_menu_Execution.aspx
"no information on what is wrong" - on the contrary, they do throughout their whole site; but most people that are considering their idea, already know what's wrong with our government without being told. In part it's what started OWS.
As far as the voting platform, although important, will be secondary to the decision of the American people to institute a Direct Democracy. I think your work could serve as a good baseline when we get to that point ......... when we have decided we've had enough.
“The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history - whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by the small elite." ~ Thomas Jefferson ~
Thanks.
I read many pages from that web-site and it presents many good ideas from different good sources, but they mostly presented under different names or without the names, blurred out, without clear implementation and sometimes I don't even see correlation between them or even compatibility. My intuition gives me red flags about legitimacy of that web-site.
Noted
if the vote were public, the companies forced voting would be more readily apparent
Good point. Though it could also indicate that most workers at the company have similar mindset or employer chooses employees by their political preferences. I just tough that extra caution wouldn't hurt.
Do you really want your banker, your school, your insurance companies, your creditors and your boss to look up your political choices?
yes
[Removed]
why am I concerned with privacy?
I assuming you are asking why another number beside ssn?
Well, I guess it's optional, it might be useful to prevent situations when corporation forcing their workers to vote for specific issue or marketing company gathering information on people based on their political preferences or even identity targeting based on political preferences.
The nation isnt ready for this. Things arent rough enough yet.
So we are to completly do away with the Constitution?
I didn't say anything about Constitution. I'm just presenting the type of president that would actually represent the people, not the corporations and it seems to be fully constitutional.
You would have to do away the core of the constitution for this to be implemented. It established the mechanism of representative democracy, and innumerates the powers of the various branches of government.
Your idea may or may not have merit, but disregarding that you would have to have a brand new constitution in order to put this into effect is ignoring something very important.
Constitution rewrite would require a revolution + somebody to actually rewrite it. You making it too complicated.
My idea is simple, it would be exactly as it is now, except the president would represent the people, not the corporations.
What is not constitutional about it?
And why it needs to be rewrite for it to be implemented?
It can't be exactly as it is now. As it is now, the law, as required by the Constitution, establishes that the House of representatives and the Senate introduce and vote on laws. After both houses of congress pass the laws, the president signs them or vetoes them. The veto can be overridden by a 2/3rds majority of Congress. If that law is challenged by anyone on the basis of its adherence to the constitution, it is decided by the courts which can strike it down.
The president cannot make law. He is not authorized by the Constitution to sign anything like what you're describing. Direct democracy is prohibited in the Constitution. The founders intentionally wrote it that way.
Nothing in your system abides by the process demanded by the Constitution. In order for your system to replace that process mandated by law, the law itself - the Constitution - would have to change.
What one CAN do is to demand that your representatives in Congress abide by your will. They can then draft laws reflecting the things you want. That process is called lobbying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EewGMBOB4Gg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
You think voter fraud is bad now just implement this stupid idea.
If you carefully read the outlined "voting platform", you will see, that "voter fraud" is impossible in the platform as each person can see their vote history and all the other histories.
Any electronic medium used for such a thing can be manipulated. It just won't work. Besides,the gridlock would be horrible and you leave the initial workings up to a small group of people. It's ripe for fraud my friend.
False, while electronic is being manipulated right now! And not only medium, together with the participants! Almost any electronic medium would be better then the paper one we use now! It's like stone age method of voting.
Google has really horrible gridlock while regularly indexing the whole Internet... (sarcasm)
Open Source!
This is the most irrefutable argument I have to deal with. it's like saying "Let's just keep it as it is..." This kind of conservative thinking is what got us into this whole mess.