Voting Fun – What does it Feel Like to Have a Say?

One of the pillars within the Living Income Guaranteed proposal is the substantiating of Democracy through Direct Political Participation. Technology is available to hold regular votes that includes a large number of individuals. These votes can range from participatory budgeting where each citizen is asked to approve the yearly national budget, to making decisions on a daily basis on a local/municipality level.

Now – before such increased direct political participation is a reality – let’s do a little test to see what it feels like. So – here are some mock-questions where you’re asked to give your input. Imagine that this relates to your direct reality (eg. your town) – and your answer has a weight that influences the outcome of the decision. Of course, in reality – a lot more context would be given to each question – providing information about the different options, what benefits and costs are involved. Pretend that you are aware of all these factors and are answering after having weighed the options carefully. At the end of the poll you’ll be asked what it felt like to have a say, where you can share for instance that you felt uncomfortable in a way or actually felt empowered.

Let’s have some voting fun!

Here is the link: http://surveynuts.com/surveys/take?id=38568&c=357448241DFNH

It won't take you more than 5mins ;).

Read More

Day 208: Is Equal Money a Fascist Regime?

Continuing from yesterday's blog - Day 207: Will Equal Money Bring about a Utopia? - we're here going to have a look at the common accusation that Equal Money Capitalism or the Equal Money System will be a Fascist regime - where some even claim there will be some form of concentration camps where people will be brainwashed...

It is never really clear what the context is in which Equal Money supporters will apparently go and do this brainwashing, so I will walk through the different contexts that I see could be referred to.

The first one is the idea that the Equal Money supporters will attempt to utilize mind-technology to try to persuade anyone who does not agree with the Equal Money proposal. In terms of this point - there's really nothing to worry about. We've stated several times that Equal Money will only be implemented through Political means. This means that: if a vote is held to determine whether an EMS system would be implemented and the vote determines that the majority is not in favor of Equal Money - then it will simply not be implemented. There's not more to it, no-one will go and harass anyone that did not vote for Equal Money. That's completely non-democratic.

If the vote determining that the majority votes for implementation of Equal Money and you're then asking: what about the minority that does not agree with Equal Money? That is a point that is established by the democratic rules today. When the majority votes and the vote is binding, the minority has to adjust to the binding vote. That is how democracy operates at the moment. Once Equal Money is then implemented, the democratic system would change. Direct democracy will be instated in such a way that voting is no longer about implementing the policies and decisions that the majority wants, but will stand in relation to agreeing whether the proposed policy is indeed what is best for all. So, if one votes for the policy, one agrees that the policy is best for all. If one disagrees with the policy, one must provide proof that there is inequality in the equation and that it will cause harm that can be prevented - and then one can suggest adjustments to the proposed policy or suggest alternatives.

From this point onwards - if individuals continue to be in disagreement with Equal Money and the policies that are established through such democratic means - three things can happen.

Scenario 1 - one takes some time to adjust and after a while sees that the fears one had about Equal Money had no real foundation, and in seeing how society operates according to the principles of Equality and What is Best for All - that it actually works out.

Or - scenario number 2: you continue to be in disagreement with Equal Money and express this disagreement through democratic means. Each one will have their online LifeProfile where they will stand in direct contact with the government administrators. When such input is received, you will be asked to supply specific information in terms of how you see yourself being harmed within the current system. If the information you provide indicates that you are indeed being harmed unnecessarily - solutions will be implemented to correct the disharmony in the design of the system. If it is found from the information your provided that the cause of your discontent is not within the system as the system is sound within the principles of harmony, equality and what is best for all - then support will be provided in terms of explaining how alternatives of the current system would cause greater harm. These points would have been scientifically determined through the policy-making process. If these explanations are rejected by the being without other reason than 'I just don't agree', then this may indicate that there may be some psychological imbalance where the person is not sufficiently capable of considering another as equal to themselves. In these cases, then, psychological support will be offered, where professionals will be available to assist you in correcting your own psychological disharmonies. This will not be compulsory. Forcing a person to change will not result in actual self-responsibility and self-correction - one can only correct oneself - therefore, assistance can be offered, but it cannot be forced upon the person. If assistance is refused, one will have to live with one's own discontent as the refusal to change will be one's own responsibility.

In the 3rd scenario - the disagreement with Equal Money will be expressed through spiteful behavior in deliberately acting in a way that is in disagreement with the laws and rules that have been established through democratic means under the Constitutional principle of what is best for all. In such cases, one has decided to deliberately cause harm and disharmony. Again - firstly, it will be investigated whether your discontent flows from a disharmony within the system that would cause you to 'act out'. If this is the case, steps will be taken to correct the problem. If this is not the case, then one requires to face the consequences of one's spitefulness. When a being is deliberate within causing harm and disharmony when one lives in a system that supports each one equally and provides the best results for everyone - there will be no more choice involved. One will be placed in a facility for self-correction. One has at this point forsaken one's rights to be a part of the society as one is willing to harm others within the society, and has created oneself to be a threat to others. Within the self-correction facilities, again - one will be assisted and supported to correct one's own abusive patterns. No one will attempt to change you - because one can only change oneself if the change is to stand within actual realization, understanding and integrity. This the only valid change. Therefore, professionals will continue to support you, but if one does not support oneself towards actual self-correction, one cannot expect to return to society, considering the risk one poses to others.

Herein - consider that these self-correction facilities are not concentration camps and the procedure is very similar to the correctional system that is in place currently. However, currently - when individuals break the agreements of society, they are branded as 'criminals' and are removed from society where they are placed in a cell as punishment, and from that, supposedly they 'learn a lesson'. We have seen that this approach is not effective. Firstly, because many of the 'criminal behavior' is a direct outflow and consequence of a system that does not support each one effectively, causing individuals to resort to crime to support themselves. When crime can be prevented in the way we structure our society, it should be done - but this is not sufficiently considered within our current system. Secondly - most people coming out of prison do not learn any lesson. Instead, they feel alienated and often fall back in their previous patterns. Those imprisoned are not sufficiently supported in understanding their own psychological and behavioral patterns and are not sufficiently guided in terms of how they are able to correct these patterns. Therefore - self-correction facilities will be the correction of what we currently know to be prisons - where individuals are no longer abandoned or punished - but unconditionally supported to as effectively as possible be re-integrated into society.

Related articles

• Day 206: Will Equal Money Bring about a Utopia?
• Day 193: Is Equal Money Capitalism Doomed to Fail?
• Day 195: Moneyless Societies and Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 203: The Mockery of Democracy Continues - Dead People Voting in Zimbabwe
• Day 196: Market Mechanisms and Equal Money
• Day 200: Collapse of Global Civilization Inevitable?
• Day 197: Equal Money Capitalism - Freedom or Control?
• Day 201: The Power of 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 +... in Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 186: The Invisible Hand is Invisible because it Doesn't Exist - Equal Money Capitalism and Providing Results that are Best for All
• Day 183: The Myth of No Alternative and Equal Money Capitalism

Read More

Day 168: The Future of Integrity with Equal Money Capitalism

Note: The EMC is an entirely new project that was started a week ago. We’re at the moment in the phase where we are brainstorming by answering questions. It’s a messy process – but an effective one to get all the relevant points addressed. So – also note that points will evolve and change as we go as we are not setting things in stone, but on a journey towards designing the EMC. The principles upon which EMC is based are laid out in the previous blog-posts. From those principles, we work our way towards what life in EMC would practically be like and how the system will function from an economic perspective.

Money in EMC

Q: What will money be backed by? will anything give it its value...or is that not necessary?

A: Life value will back money -- Labour backs money - which is your capital - that is why the money supply will increase and decrease according to population as each one requires to have an income that recognises their life value and that allows them to live a life worth living.

Q: In terms of printing money and the paper and money that costs, rather turning everything digital ?

A: Yes - digital - let's not kill trees for no reason.

Politics in EMC

Q: Who will sit in governmental positions? no more elections?

A: Politics will largely remain the same as within the EMS proposal - so, yes - there will still be elections. To read up on this point, please read: http://equalmoney.org/wiki/Politics

Q: will we vote on every decision directly through internet? Or still elect once every 5 years and they can do whatever they want after elected?

A: This will be organised in the same was as presented in the Equal Money System wiki: direct democracy - everyone is directly involved in policy making

What about those who provide services instead of goods?

Q: How do people earn an income from jobs that don't produce a product that is purchased, or will everyone need to do a job that produces something to be bought? Or does compensation also happen as paid from the government not just consumers purchasing products?
A: Any value that is added, whether through providing goods or services, will be compensated. So – the same principle applies to employees in companies that produce goods and employees of companies that provide services – the price of the good or the service is determined in such a way that all participants receive a fair share of the profit so that all end up with an equal income. In terms of those working for the government or providing government services – they will also receive an equal income – this is the purpose of taxation.

How to Ensure Full Employment?

Q: How do we make sure everyone is employed; will we have to create meaningless jobs like in the army – dig a hole, cover a hole? 

A: There are many jobs that require to be done that aren't being done at the moment - the Earth is barely taken care of. Remember that a company’s responsibility will extent further than merely the production of goods and services. Each company will have a Compassion and an Environmental Department.

Compassion Departments are a social function. Such departments will assist, for instance, with giving care to the elderly, organising and providing daycare, assisting victims of natural disasters and so on. Individuals whose jobs within the production process are replaced by technology, will instead be employed within the Compassion Department of the company and continue to receive their income.

Environmental Departments of a company fulfil the function of giving as one would like to receive. Companies will use resources from the Earth and will likely create pollutants that affect the environment. The Environmental Departments are in charge of giving back to the Earth in terms of assisting the environment to renew the resources that were taken, for instance, through tree-planting, creating dams, etc. Furthermore, it will assist within mitigating or stopping the negative effects of pollutants, such as, for instance, water or air purification.

Once everyone is employed and all meaningful jobs are being done - we decrease working hours. For instance, if a job requirement is 8 hours, 2 people can do 4 hours each. Also - people don't have to work for 60 years of their lives - we can go on retirement when we are 30-40.

Related articles

• Day 163: Equal Money Capitalism - Redefining Profit
• Day 167: Harmony and Equilibrium within Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 166: Corporate Social Responsibility in Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 165: Equal Profit Share and Equal Money Capitalism
• Day 162: EQUAL MONEY CAPITALISM - The Way Forward
• Day 259: Give Happiness, Get Happiness

Read More

Day 150: Voting Responsibility and Tight-Knit Communities in an Equal Money System

 Also, would everyone be required to vote?

Voting in an Equal Money System is not a matter of requirement, but a matter of responsibility. For society to function in a way that is Best for All, participation, contribution and understanding on an individual level are essential. Each one's participation or non-participation affects everyone else - and as such, everyone is equally responsible for the results of the participation and non-participation.

Understand that, in terms of the points of apathy, not caring about or simply not wanting to vote (which are currently very common) - these attitudes are results from, and reactions towards the current economic and political system of inequality. Non-participation has become a way of expressing that one does not care about the current economic and political system, because this very system does not care about us either. However, in a system of harmony and equality, there is no valid reason for a person to not do their part in participating in the process of life on Earth. Unless it can be shown very clearly through mathematical and scientific evidence that the relationships within the system are producing disharmony - which causes a person to refuse to participate - non-participation is deliberate and a form of spite. As such, it will raise a 'red flag' to indicate that the person requires assistance as they are in disharmony with themselves and with society. And such disharmony, if left unaddressed will, in turn, cause some form of harm or disharmony to occur on other levels. Therefore, the person will receive the appropriate psychological assistance to correct the disharmony.

Finally, there are currently many areas of the world with very, let's call it "tight-knit" communities where people are all of the same religion or background or maybe just a small, isolated community that has lived together for a long time and does things in a very specific way. For such communities, I forsee resistance to joining the larger Equal Money System.

To what extent will these communities be accomodated? If they made it clear that they wanted no part in the overall system but wished to remain non-violently separate continuing on in their own way, how would that work?

We live in such a large and complex world, I can understand how people would see the Equal Money System as this nice idea but when it comes down to the practical implications of implementing it- they're lost.

Groups have developed various kinds of coping mechanisms in order to survive in a world of inequality. Tight-knit communities that like to somewhat isolate themselves from other communities are an example of such a coping mechanism in reaction to the current system of Inequality. Since inequality is the cause of these types of group behaviours and dynamics, they will be addressed through the introduction of a system of Equality - as this will remove the cause of the reactive mode. Of course, this will not be an easy process as there will be resistance to change in the same way that everyone resists change on some level. Though, resistance to change will also occur from the perspective that - since they are in a coping mechanism and believe that they are managing 'just fine' on their own, the perception exists that no other help is needed. Tight-knit communities will not be looking for a solution, because, from their point of view - they have the solution. Though, what is not considered within that is that we live in a world where everything is interconnected and that each one's actions have a consequence on everything and everyone else. Therefore, remaining isolated from each other will never bring about true solutions that are Best for All.

So - education will become an important factor, as education will bring about the realization that there are different ways to handle things, that provide more viable and substantial solutions. This education process will take time as one of the points that is required to be proven is that humans can in fact change. This is why an Equal Money System will not be a resolution or a solution within the next 2, 3, 4 years. It will take a process of 10 to 20 years of massive education, before we can get to a point where we can introduce, consider and vote on a new system. Through education, we'll make sure that individuals and groups are not sabotaged by their own ignorance. And thus, reversing the statement that 'ignorance is bliss' - in bringing about the realization that bliss is actually the action of living together in a way that is Best for All – ensuring each other’s harmony and one's own harmony.

Will those promoting an Equal Money System work on developing more details as time goes on?

Yes, definitely. In fact, comments and questions (like yours) assist us greatly in fine-tuning, adjusting and expanding on the Equal Money proposal. And thus, thank you for your participation, please do continue!

Related articles

• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System
• Day 149: Credits and Levels of Administration within an Equal Money System
• Day 132: Namibia is Unto Something

Read More

Day 149: Credits and Levels of Administration within an Equal Money System

This blog is a continuation within replying to a comment made in relation to 'Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System'. 

The point of resources allocation will further be clarified within the next blog.

Credits within an Equal Money System is only a 'word' and only serves to facilitate the allocation and movement of goods -- credits will not hold any other intrinsic value as money or credit do currently (where money is used as a 'store of value'), but only have a mathematical and accounting function. The credits within the Equal Money System will indicate the available resources, what is available for each one and accordingly credits will be allocated and then get distributed.

The amount of credits and types of credits each on receive, will be based on a formula as set out within the Constitution, that we all have agreed on.

When you view your Life Profile where your available credits are displayed, you then either would indicate "Yes, this particular allocation I am going to use" or "No, I am not going to use this particular allocation". If you’re not going to use it, it remains in your main available resource ‘bank’ so to speak. Which is where your credits are ‘stored’. Note that you won't ‘own’ the credits, it’s purely available resources on Earth.

What I'm getting at: how would it work for local issues like where should a new water pipe be constructed in a certain specific small area if that change doesn't drastically effect everything else in the overall system?

Both global and federal/local levels will function within the same framework in terms of laws and policies. Implementation of policy will be region-specific which is where local administration comes in.

Implementation at a local level will be carried out by a local council, elected by the locals, which must regularly be substituted by new members. The point would be to make the local council an opportunity for each one to take a moment of responsibility within the system and to do their ‘civic duty’ so to speak. Therefore, each member will only serve one term. And within that one hopes to eventually have each person during a lifetime serving a term on the council, so that each one can experience what it means to work with a group of people.

Within this, education again plays a part. A person will not just be able to become a council member without first going through preparation, where one requires to go through a process of training and understanding in terms of what is involved – so that there is a smooth transitioning process within changing from council to council.

To apply for such a position, one would submit their availability and apply for a position. Once their term has ended, it is time for the next person. Unless there is no alternative, a person will not be allowed a second term; each one only gets a single term. This way, each one can get the opportunity of experiencing what it means to be a leader within a point of responsibility and within a point of distribution.

In terms of any form of abuse that may occur, anyone will be able to address and direct the point of abuse directly to the federal administration in reporting that there is a problem in this particular local council, where authority is being abused. If a person makes such an assertion and this assertion is based on some form of mental disorder, it will be addressed accordingly. If the abuse of authority is based on some mental disorder, it will be addressed and supported accordingly. The fact that a person goes into a mental disorder does not make them completely dysfunctional, and thus does not completely exclude them from participation. They are addressed, corrected and then receive a chance of forgiveness to correct their point. One will thus not be ‘branded’ as mental disordered – because it is simply part of the human condition at this stage. Currently, not enough is yet understood about how this all functions, and therefore, there is going to be some difficulties, where we need to address the mental disorder.

Once a person has proven their effectiveness within administrative responsibilities on a local level, they are eligible to submit their application for a position on a (more) global level.

http://equalmoney.org/wiki/Goods 

http://equalmoney.org/wiki/Politics 

 Related articles

• Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System
• Day 148: Policy Initiation and the Role of Administrators in an Equal Money System

Read More

Day 147: Constitutional Equality and Voting in an Equal Money System

Many people ask the question whether 'What's Best for All' and 'Democracy' from the starting point of 'the majority rules' are not contradictory or incompatible.

What is being looked at within such questions is a scenario where a majority wants to enforce a particular policy -- but this policy is not best for all – what then?

Many democracies existent today are constitutional democracies. A constitution contains a set of fundamental principles and guidelines according to which the particular state will be governed. It is thus a 'framework' within which all decisions, policy and legislation are made. Whenever a new policy is being developed or when policies are reviewed -- it has to be checked whether it adheres to the base principles, as outlined within the Constitution. If they are not -- they are considered to be 'unconstitutional' and can hence be disregarded. This also implies, that even in democracies today -- one cannot vote on policies which are in essence unconstitutional, and there is thus a 'limit' on what is acceptable and allowed. So, what we are introducing within and Equal Money System, where Equality and What is Best for All are the base principles of the Equal Money Constitution: is nothing New.

Within this, it is thus implied that achieving and enforcing what is Best for All is not contradictory to democracy per se -- as the available options to be voted on, will always be within the framework of what is Best for All. As such -- voting will not exist from the perspective that one is presented with a policy and either 'likes' or 'dislikes' it based on an opinion one has and would vote accordingly. Instead, one will be presented with policies which have been designed by various agents from various backgrounds/expertise who have volunteered to contribute their time to design policies as frameworks and guidelines in terms of how particular points are to be managed -- and these are always designed within the starting point and context of Equality and what is Best for All. The end result coming from this process, will then be peer reviewed to cross-reference the proposal and make sure that all points are aligned within what is Best for All and that no points have been left unconsidered.

All of these processes, will occur in a transparent, publicly available manner -- where at any moment, anyone can check the movement of information -- leaving no space for 'hidden agendas'.

Upon completion of the peer review, the particular proposal or policy will be presented to the public for voting -- which is then in essence the final stage of review/cross-referencing. Within the voting process one is then in fact indicating that one agrees that what is proposed is indeed Best for All -- and if one disagrees, one would have to back up this disagreement with the necessary proof and evidence -- upon which the policy/proposal can be revised/re-evaluated (simply having an 'opinion', is thus not acceptable).

Within this structure Education will play a major role, within ensuring effective education to all children in order to provide them with the necessary mathematical, scientific and common sense skills and insights, to be able to evaluate and participate within policy formulation or policy-review effectively.

The focus is thus on the Participation of the Majority within directly taking part in the policy creation process.

Within this, the approach of 'Prevention is the Best Cure' also plays a vital role -- where we want to ensure that all policies and decision-making are done in order to prevent consequences resulting from inequality. When consequences have already manifested, this would indicate a major problem in the effective application processes where a point within the foundation is unsound and 'cracked' so to speak, which results in having to 'go back' and fix things -- which is unnecessary and could have been prevented, and these points would as such require urgent attention. We thus want to ensure at all all points are taken into consideration at all times, so that a sound foundation can be in place which will prevent unnecessary harm and abuse from taking place. This is in contrast to our current system, which only acts after problems and consequences have already taken place and only then devise solutions -- which is in essence, doing everything 'backwards'.

Related articles

• Day 137: Greece: The Birth and Death of Democracy
• Day 111: Evilution - Neocolonialism - Part 2
• Day 128: What We've Failed to Consider about Policy and Voting
• Day 141: Even the Rain: Water Politics - Catastroika
• Day 140: Congo - Children Torn from Families as we Speak to Fight as Soldiers in Civil War
• Day 142: Presidents under Fire

Read More

Day 104: We have to Protect our Freedom!

The following paragraph is taken from the blog-post 'Day 102: Liberalism':

"Within liberalism it is believed that the individual can only “realise their potential” within being ‘free’. All individuals ought to enjoy equal freedom and within this is implied that people are only free to the extent that their freedom does not infringe that of others. Liberalism also likes to emphasizes freedom in the light of private matters and freedom as the absence of state interference. State intervention is often interpreted as undermining the individual’s liberty, which is why liberals are pro capitalism and proponents of free market economies."

The principle of individual freedom is used time and time again to prevent a way of organising society in a way that places the group above the individual.

So - we take a moment here to look at the question: what are these individual freedoms that are so important to be defended?

Apparently we are all immensely free and any proposition to focus our efforts towards the common good instead of individual pursuits of happiness would infringe on these freedoms. So, I took a moment to look at a human being's life and started wondering what all these freedoms are that people keep talking about.

Looking at a human being's life today, there really isn't that much people can 'choose' for themselves. You cannot choose to go to school, this is usually mandatory, you cannot choose to go to work, you have to go to work to make money. So - in terms of the basic structure of your life-path, it has already been laid out before us and there's nothing much you can do to change that at all.

So, what we can do is 'fill in the colours' - we can choose what we study. However, this choice is not exactly 'free' in the absolute extent, because what we study is often determined by intelligence, by money available by the parents or support structure and by the prospect of how much money you'll be able to make with a job once you've completed these studies.

We can also not exactly choose what job we want to do, because it depends on whether there are any vacancies available and if you can 'compete' with other people out for the same position.

So, what is left then? We can choose who we spend our life with, but even this is often determined by the need for financial security, where marriages often happen for money and not for 'love'.

Then, what does choice come down to?

To what we wear? Come on! What you wear is firstly determined by the size and shape of your body, by what is available in the stores, by what you can afford, by what is seen as acceptable in your social group of friends. And that's not even considering the limitations imposed by regulations that would deem certain ways of clothing to be offensive or 'too provoking'.

What brands we buy, maybe that's where our freedom lies. But what brands we buy is again influenced by our social environment and most of all by advertisements - where companies continuously brainwash us to think and believe that their brand is the best and buying their brand would make us happy. When we act on this brainwashing, is this the freedom that is spoken about?

Maybe our freedom is in what we do with our 'free time', like what hobbies and activities we partake in. But what we can do with our free time is again determined by the money we have available, what are talents and skills are.

Freedom could be picking out the next holiday-destination - but then again, can you really speak about freedom when you're talking about one or two weeks in a year where you are able to leave your home while the rest of the year you're forced to work?

Or maybe you mean that freedom is the ability to go vote once every so many years to choose the people to represent you in politics - but I mean, really - you only vote once every so many years and beyond that, you have no say.

I'm just trying to figure this out, you know - what everyone keeps talking about.

Let's take an Equal Money System as an example. You'll still be going through education and herein have a say in what you enjoy studying. You'll still work, although will only require to work for about 4 years and after that, it's up to you if you want to contribute or not. Your clothing will still be determined by what is available, except you'll have time to play with making your own clothes and be creative within it. You'll have a massive amount of free time where you can really dedicate time to what you enjoy doing, to developing skills and interests. You'll be able to decide who you live with and this time money won't even be a constricting factor. In terms of politics, you'll be involved in all decision-making, not just once every so many years. So - looking at all the freedoms we're so afraid of losing - you won't lose any in an economic system that is focused on the well-being of the group - you'll only gain more.

So, someone please explain to me what these important freedoms are we apparently stand to lose, because I'm just not seeing it!

Related articles

• Day 102: Liberalism
• Day 143: Free Stuff! And True Activism
• Day 137: FREE Choice and True Activism
• Day 142: Money and True Activism
• Day 122: TRUE ACTIVIST COLLEGE EDUCATION

Read More

Day 99: Money Votes

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise – that the way the IMF and World Bank operate in terms of their voting policies – is in fact how voting all over the world operates – where an individual is not respected within their individual right – but where this respect/power to vote is based on money – where those who have money are able to vote and the more money they have the more their vote counts in comparison to others

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to see and realise that we do not have an actual democracy anywhere in the world – but only work with ‘virtual democracies’ which only exist in the minds of men – where we believe and perceive ourselves to live in a ‘just’ and ‘fair’ society because ‘our political system is based on democracy – power of the people!!’ – without ever for a moment stopping and questioning/checking out whether this virtual democracy which we’ve constructed in our minds actually matches physical reality and the real political process in the world

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to actually investigate/study the true economic and political process within the world – where if one does it becomes obvious that the elite as a minority plays a major role in influence economic and political policies – where these are manipulated/lobbied to suit their own personal interest rather than the interest / benefit of the public as a whole

I forgive myself that I haven’t accepted and allowed myself to look beyond the idea I have created in my mind about ‘democracy’ where I was taught as a child that we are great and that our sense of civilisation is so amazing because we implemented ‘democracy’ which implies ‘power to the people’ / ‘rule by the people’ – while this ‘educational lesson’ was nothing but propaganda to feel good about ourselves as a human race while in reality we are the most fucked up beings in the world which the Daily News and current state of Affairs in the world CLEARLY indicate

I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to have been chuffed with the idea that ‘we live in a democracy’ and that this is ‘so cool’ because everyone counts, every person’s vote matters – but where when we are grown up and living life in the system we do not care to bother ourselves with politics because we are too busy/occupied in our minds playing out our consumerism lifestyles and do not care to be part of decision making processes, thinking it’s someone else’s job – I just want to have fun and live my life – and so I forgive myself that I have accepted and allowed myself to abdicate my self-responsibility within not being bothered with politics because I do not care about how the world/people are managed as long as I am taken care off


I commit myself to the establishment of an ACTUAL DEMOCRACY as One Man One Vote as the Equal Money System where we for the first time in the whole of human history will have an operational democracy

I commit myself to educate those willing to hear on the importance of politics and economics – and to show each one’s individual and collective responsibility – where One Man One Vote is not just a right one consider exerting, but a point of responsibility each one must consider within being Here on Earth and thus having to be part of the decision making of how things function / get managed in the world

I commit myself to show that all democracies until now have only ever existed as democracies within the minds of people – but have never been real, actual democracies – since the only power / voting power which ever existed has always been intrinsically linked to money

I commit myself to show provide everyone with Equal Voting Power through supporting an Equal Money System which will re-distribute money and so power so we can have an actual democracy for the first time

I commit myself to show that how the IMF and World Bank operate in terms of voting – where voting is based on one’s share of money as being a ‘shareholder’ / ‘investor’ – is exactly how other smaller voting processes take place expect that it is not stated as blatantly

I commit myself to a world where All people have Equal Value as Life and to put an end to our current world system where Value as the Right to Life is being hogged by a few and used as leverage against the majority in the quest for Power

Related articles

• Day 120: True Activist Politics
• Day 88: Capitalism vs Socialism?
• Day 98: The Unholy Trinity
• Day 128: Economic Slavery and True Activism
• Day 137: FREE Choice and True Activism
• Day 145: Labor and Slavery
• Day 132: Politics and True Activism

Read More