Majocracy the power of people not the politicians.

[RawThinkTank]

Believe it or not this is going to be the politicians worst nightmare come true. I don’t see any problems with this idea becoming our future governance.

We can vote from any phone or net to a voting machine with our own Password and give our vote from any safe place while the voting center will be a heavily guarded one as there will be only one for a huge area reducing the election cost.

Hey but I haven’t told u the best part yet, we don’t require any voting day for this system so it is possible to change our vote anytime and as manytimes as we want. As soon as we see misuse of power by the person we voted for, he will be gone out of government for good; In fact we wont even require any political groups to pull each other if u think about this very carefully, but only hierarchy where we decide and politicians do their job. Our decsion can be challenged by anybody for legal grounds. Remember that its the law that will allow the rule of majority, hence decision of majority cannot be above law as that will become majority based autocracy.

There is something yet powerful we can do with this technique: we read news (anywhere), this news can have a code associated with it and then people can decide whether they agree with or not by voting for that code thread. Same can be applied for every other policy, we no longer would need processions or demonstrations to fight for our rights.

PS : There can be a site called whistleblowers.org where we can report corruption. And force investigators to do their job through majocratic voting.

I am looking forward for more such suggestions. Please

[atinymonkey]

Congratualtions, you have a political system that passes all the power to the Media.

[Daymare17]

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels advocated widespread reforms to take the power out of the hands of the banks, corporations, generals, police chiefs, etc., and to make the elected representatives accountable to the people and not to big money. Their idea of the 'Dictatorship of the Proletariat' (in reality meaning workers' democracy) comes close to your idea. The basic four points were:

1) All officials subject to election and immediate recall at any time
2) No official to receive more than a workers' wage
3) No standing army but the armed people (i.e. election of officers)
4) All state functions to be carried out by the whole able population round-robin.

Of course, these democratic reforms would be little worth without at the same time carrying out a program of widespread nationalisation, eliminating the market system, and putting the whole economy under the conscious democratic control of the population. Otherwise, the economy is still under the despotic control of a handful of unelected bankers and board members.

[Perennial]

Actually we could throw everything out except a body preparing laws and someone introducing them on tv, people could have green - yes & red - no buttons added to their remotes and could vote on acceptance of every single law. Would give the power of decision to senior citizens, though.

[RawThinkTank]

I have a nagging question to U all. What will happen if we create a forum based on the subject article of this thread and eliminate all the moderators ?

[budullewraagh]

while i strongly oppose a government controlled by government, i vehemently oppose majocracy. a majority does not necessarily know what is in its best interest. take for example hamilton and assumption. take for example south carolina's secession. take for example bleeding kansas. i would shy towards oligarchy before i accepted majocracy

[YT2095]

every 4 years or so we ELECT a dictatorship, the bars and lines that Should govorn these people and keep them in check,are being erroded!!!, slowly but surely.
No matter WHO you vote for, .Gov always wins!

[Sayonara³]

I have a nagging question to U all. What will happen if we create a forum based on the subject article of this thread and eliminate all the moderators ?
There is no "if" since you have no control here.

Seeing as this site is not a democracy, it's a pretty poor analogy.

[john5746]

Democracy and liberty are two different things. Complete majority rule will eventually lead to the loss of liberty to the minority. It is also inefficient to rule day by day based on popular opinion.

[RawThinkTank]

There is no "if" since you have no control here.

Seeing as this site is not a democracy, it's a pretty poor analogy.

Yes this site is democratic and hence premitive.

I have dedicated my life to Majocracy and hence world union.

I hope more people understand Majocracy than when they discuss this personally with me.

[budullewraagh]

problem with a united world is that culture would be completely lost. is it me or is there something absurdly wrong with mcdonalds encroaching on the business of street cafes in paris?

[Glider]

It's not just you. That's a terrible thought.

[Sayonara³]

Yes this site is democratic and hence premitive.
No, it's not democratic.

[Artorius]

seconded!!!!

[YT2095]

consider it an Enlightened Dictatorship.

life will be so much less complicated for you :)

[budullewraagh]

haha wohoo i am the proliteriat! greetings my bourgeoisie bretheren

[Gilded]

"consider it an Enlightened Dictatorship.

life will be so much less complicated for you :)"

That sounds like something Stalin said! :)

[ecoli]

What your proposing, a direct democracy, which uses technology as a voting means. It sounds good, but I worry about hackers fixing votes. Also, if a direct democracy didn't survive in Rome, I don't think it would survive here. Definately too much media interference. People would vote for the bill that has the best advertising.

[YT2095]

and I was being Tongue in Cheek when I said that too :)


I MEANT to say "One big happy Family" :)

[Artorius]

along with me the black sheep eh YT

[YT2095]

I`ve always been the "Black sheep" Odd one out since I was hatched LOL :))

I try to remain Nice about it though :)

[RawThinkTank]

What your proposing, a direct democracy, which uses technology as a voting means. It sounds good, but I worry about hackers fixing votes. Also, if a direct democracy didn't survive in Rome, I don't think it would survive here. Definately too much media interference. People would vote for the bill that has the best advertising.

Give me a better reason for not going ahead with it. If U dont now , in five years your civilization would get transformed into something dangerous called Majo-crazy.

[atinymonkey]

You are crazy. Try to stop being so crazy.

[budullewraagh]

Give me a better reason for not going ahead with it. If U dont now , in five years your civilization would get transformed into something dangerous called Majo-crazy.
in the world we live in a direct democracy is doomed to fail. referrendums on EVERYTHING would result in:
-a people pissed off at its government for sending them too many referrendums
-a people pissed off at its government for advertising their viewpoints everywhere, trying to get votes
-decisions dominated by the money held by various parties of the government
-nothing ever getting done because it takes too long and too much money to count votes all the time

you want this?

the only way this could work is in a small community of, say, 500 people

[JaKiri]

Taking, as our example, the United States of America:

Give me a better reason for not going ahead with it.

Homosexuals. Abortion. Islam. Evolutionary Theory. Nuclear Power. Freedom of Speach.

I have seen properly conducted polls that, in the US, belief or support of these things is a minority view.

Your 'society' is designed around eradicating minority views and keeping the status quo.

[Perennial]

This is starting to sound like the "majority" would in fact lead to inevitable oppression for the minority, which it does not. As well as admission that democracy is inherently flawed.

[JaKiri]

This is starting to sound like the "majority" would in fact lead to inevitable oppression for the minority, which it does not. As well as admission that democracy is inherently flawed.

If we had a referendum on, say, gay rights, and the press came out against them, then I have no doubt at all what the result would be.

The majority of people are stupid, or, if not stupid, malinformed; why should these people dictate how others live their lives?

[budullewraagh]

perennial, when you have referendums on everything of course you would have oppression of the minority. what do you think would happen? that a percent of the majority would stop and say "hey, lets change our minds just for kicks". seriously thats hogswash

[Perennial]

I'm inclined to say the current political systems do represent the majority ... the fact that the majority is typically extremely idiotic in its behavior goes in my mind hand to hand with the stupidity of nowadays popularized politics. And as such the transition to a system where essentially everyone would vote on everything wouldn't be that drastic.

People can have opposing views and still fit in the same planet, I'm not willing to swallow it that easily that the majority would want to dictate how everyone else lives - given time that would backlash on the majority due to the intrinsic differences within it, leading to development of new minorities.

[atinymonkey]

Bollocks.

[RawThinkTank]

If we had a referendum on, say, gay rights, and the press came out against them, then I have no doubt at all what the result would be.

The majority of people are stupid, or, if not stupid, malinformed; why should these people dictate how others live their lives?

Please read the article of this thread carefully, its clearly mentioned that majority is not above law. Nothing illegal is going to happen here ok. For All of U i will make sure that majority will not encroach upon minoritys freedom of choice, U all r worring prematurly, any way no one can stop me now.

[Sayonara³]

The above comment appears to be utterly stupid, unless the link between referendum and law is just something that exists in my head.

Clarification?

[budullewraagh]

Please read the article of this thread carefully, its clearly mentioned that majority is not above law. Nothing illegal is going to happen here ok. For All of U i will make sure that majority will not encroach upon minoritys freedom of choice, U all r worring prematurly, any way no one can stop me now.
trying to take over the world are we?

[RawThinkTank]

you want this?

the only way this could work is in a small community of, say, 500 people
This all waste of my precious time, I dont react to such comments that are not an hindrance for me to transform entire human civilization into majocratic one and hence in the future into collective conciousness ...

in the world we live in a direct democracy is doomed to fail. referrendums on EVERYTHING would result in:
-a people pissed off at its government for sending them too many referrendums


Wrong, I never said anything like that OK. All U have 2 Du is open newpaper read the new and give your vote. Voting is optional. People are the government, there are no oposotion parties in competition here. The referendums U r mentioning will be on a voting website with a phone also interface.

-a people pissed off at its government for advertising their viewpoints everywhere, trying to get votes
U r in darkages , there is no need of "A Gorenment Here". Every Individual has equal right to get vote on their views OK. Access to View submition is fundamental human right in Majocarcy, Freedom of Expression.

-decisions dominated by the money held by various parties of the government
Wrong, Its the fairness of Ur ideas that is important not Ur bank balance.

-nothing ever getting done because it takes too long and too much money to count votes all the time U seem to be an american crushed by politics, when world is switching to electronic ballot counting , Ur politiion are still manipulating ballots.

[RawThinkTank]

trying to take over the world are we?

Yes, I am trying to take over the world from the Politicians and give it to the people.

[Sayonara³]

I'm going back to my "only people who can spell will be allowed opinions in the new order" system of political beliefs.

It may well be a touch Draconian, but it bloody well works.

[-Demosthenes-]

Congratualtions, you have a political system that passes all the power to the Media.
That sounds about right.
while i strongly oppose a government controlled by government, i vehemently oppose majocracy. a majority does not necessarily know what is in its best interest. take for example hamilton and assumption. take for example south carolina's secession. take for example bleeding kansas. i would shy towards oligarchy before i accepted majocracy
I think I'm feeling faint, but I agree with budullewraagh.
What your proposing, a direct democracy, which uses technology as a voting means. It sounds good, but I worry about hackers fixing votes. Also, if a direct democracy didn't survive in Rome, I don't think it would survive here. Definately too much media interference. People would vote for the bill that has the best advertising.
Yeah, it would be THE biggest target for hackers in the USA, easily.
You are crazy. Try to stop being so crazy.
Now I remembered why I like monkeys so much.
in the world we live in a direct democracy is doomed to fail. referrendums on EVERYTHING would result in:
-a people pissed off at its government for sending them too many referrendums
-a people pissed off at its government for advertising their viewpoints everywhere, trying to get votes
-decisions dominated by the money held by various parties of the government
-nothing ever getting done because it takes too long and too much money to count votes all the time
...
I feel so very sick... I agree.

I think there are a few obvious problems with "majocracy". First of all, the word looks stupid :D
Ok the real first of all, there are alot and alot of issues to be decided on, and you would have every single person vote on all of them? About how many issues per person per day? I'll guess... alot. People won't have time to do anything else. And yes, budullewraagh is right, everyone would be pissed off! I would be pissed off, when I turned 18 I'd say,"ah crap, now I have to vote for about 6 hours a day" it's just an impractical idea. Another problem, the general public is kind of stupid, and what I mean by "kind of" stupid is VERY stupid. I need not show examples of the public stupidity.
So basically you have a bunch of pissed off people and everything goes wrong and then we have something we like to call anarchy.

Here is my proof:
Majocracy=Pissed off people and eventual Anarchy
Anarchy and pissed off people= BAD

How ever messed up our goverment, I'm pretty sure this wouldn't help. Besides theres nothing wrong that a little major reform won't fix :D

[john5746]

democracy != liberty.

Also, everyone being a politician? How about everyone being their own doctor?

We elect representatives who supposedly have the time and ability to review topics and vote on them, usually with the welfare of his(her) voters in mind.

The people have the power to remove those they dislike - and guess what? Most of them(especially young ones) don't vote. Apathy. And this is for leaders of the country. Can you imagine small little referendums - 5 a day, etc. 10% of the population if your lucky would decide.

Start small - family, dorm, class, etc. See what happens.

Or do as Marx - write a book and get some other idiot to try it.

[Ophiolite]

I submit that the principal weakness of the concept is that RawThinkTank would be one of the voters.http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

[RawThinkTank]

democracy != liberty.
Majocracy=Power of the people.


Also, everyone being a politician? How about everyone being their own doctor?
That a wrong view. The doctors U refer are not going to be politicians any more. They are going to just do the work of surgery ooops I mean administration of the world. So All that todays presidents, ministers and array of others will exist, but there wont be any parties to pull each other legs. Stand for the post get the votes and U become the president not because of the party but of your previous reputation. Misuuse the power and bye bye.


We elect representatives who supposedly have the time and ability to review topics and vote on them, usually with the welfare of his(her) voters in mind.

Naturally.


The people have the power to remove those they dislike - and guess what? Most of them(especially young ones) don't vote. Apathy. And this is for leaders of the country. Can you imagine small little referendums - 5 a day, etc. 10% of the population if your lucky would decide.


Compare this with UKRANIAN situation.
Dosent matter how many vote. What matters is if the subject is of grave importance people will vote and the aggressors with be instantly repressed.


Start small - family, dorm, class, etc. See what happens.
Or do as Marx - write a book and get some other idiot to try it.
Correct. Thats exactly I am working on. My bussiness strategy is based on Majocracy. Its a financial success and hence my confidence.

This is going to be a revolution in evolution itself.

[Ophiolite]

This all waste of my precious time, I dont react to such comments that are not an hindrance for me to transform entire human civilization into majocratic one and hence in the future into collective conciousness ...

Were we to apply the principals of majocracy to this statement the results could be interesting. The majority of voters would applaud your faulty grammar and syntactical obscurity, for it likely mirrors there own. But most would reject your messianic self obsession. So, you win on form and lose on content.

[budullewraagh]

this kid doesn't know when to give up
Majocracy=Power of the people.
we just proved that majocracy is not even remotely effective. SCREW THE PEOPLE. "the people" do not always know what is legal or best for them. "the people" control the power to oppress minorities. "the people" are the downfall of society in your government. if you give "the people" full power you doom them to failure.


That a wrong view. The doctors U refer are not going to be politicians any more. They are going to just do the work of surgery ooops I mean administration of the world. So All that todays presidents, ministers and array of others will exist, but there wont be any parties to pull each other legs. Stand for the post get the votes and U become the president not because of the party but of your previous reputation. Misuuse the power and bye bye.
there are no "wrong" views so you can stop being an elitist. oh and btw, "U" doesn't provide emphasis. try for "YOU" or YOU. not that many doctors are also politicians, in case you were wondering. they tend to not have the time to do things on the side like that. especially such important things as politics. with regard to your hopelessly idealistic view on parties not existing, i laugh. you cannot eliminate the entire party system, nor can you prevent parties from meeting. corruption is just a part of human nature. "power corrupts; absolute power, absolutely"- never forget lord acton's words. a leader WILL form a party on the premise that he can smite the opposition. you know, that last line makes it sound like the us...except wait, we don't use that around here even when we have fools in the executive branch. the government will just control the military and prevent an uprising from being successful.


Correct. Thats exactly I am working on. My bussiness strategy is based on Majocracy. Its a financial success and hence my confidence.

This is going to be a revolution in evolution itself.
tell me about the success of your business strategy.

this is not going to be a revolution in evolution. what you need for this to happen successfully is a huge revolution in evolution, but you cannot change human nature. sorry buddy

[RawThinkTank]

this kid doesn't know when to give upResistance is futile, my persistent determination and life long devotion is gona transform Ur civilization. But thats justa phrase, my actual driving force is human incomprehendability.
we just proved that majocracy is not even remotely effective. SCREW THE PEOPLE. "the people" do not always know what is legal or best for them.
Huss, U sound like a frustrated politician whose career is coming to an permanent end. If U did prove something indeed then why am I writing this ? Well that’s because When I counter proved U, Ur brain never got out of wonderland. U r like a prisoner who grew Up in jail and is afraid to be free.


"the people" control the power to oppress minorities. "the people" are the downfall of society in your government. if you give "the people" full power you doom them to failure.

I invented Majocracy to give people the freedom of choice instead of being imposed by the choice of the politician. Hence freedom of choice gets priority over majority if its gona violate it.

And thats so because freedom of Equality is even above freedom of choice. So U cant just take a poll, get majority and create unequality thats what politician do. There are gona be laws based on reason, hence Reason is above any kinda government or else it will become anarchy.

[QUOTE=budullewraagh]Bla Bla Bla ...you cannot eliminate the entire party system, nor can you prevent parties from meeting.

Why ?

corruption is just a part of human nature. "power corrupts; absolute power, absolutely"- never forget lord acton's words. a leader WILL form a party on the premise that he can smite the opposition. you know, that last line makes it sound like the us...except wait, we don't use that around here even when we have fools in the executive branch. the government will just control the military and prevent an uprising from being successful.

Stop playing politics here in SFN. Stop imposing your nature as of humans.

It seems U have no idea about Rationalists like me and their nature.

Its very difficult for majority to exploit majority any ways.

tell me about the success of your business strategy.
I wana U to get a JAW droping AWE experience when the world around is transformed. Then thugs like U who suck our blood ... U can run but there wont be a place left to hide. My strategy is to become ( seceretly ) the worlds first trillionaire then I will crush people like U with Majority+Money.

this is not going to be a revolution in evolution. what you need for this to happen successfully is a huge revolution in evolution, but you cannot change human nature. sorry buddy

I wana U 2 believe this so that U dont become a hurdle in my way.

Right now the world is between haves and have nots. The haves have the knowledge that Majocracy is most important turn in human evolution and have nots like U are gona suffer due to their determination to do moral obligatory duty of being with right once they know whats wrong.

[JaKiri]

This is a stupid thread.

Stupid, stupid, stupid.