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 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