The Egalitarian Proposal System

Makes Representative Government Obsolete

The Egalitarian Proposal System is designed to make politics, courts, committees, boards, councils and other decision-making bodies, obsolete. Rather than look to a group of preselected people to make decisions for the whole, the Egalitarian Proposal System facilitates the discovery of a true consensus, where each individual has their say, where the vast majority of the community, organization or population, agree to proposals that they— the people — themselves make. In this system, proposals are made by any sovereign at any time - and that includes you! A website houses the entire system. People go to a single website and there, learn what is happening either in their locale or anywhere in the world. The Egalitarian Proposal System can be utilized now, today, no need to wait for the existing system to collapse.

Representative government was only useful when the population was illiterate. It is antiquated for the times we are in. We don’t need to be represented when we ourselves, can speak, read, write and think. Why do you need someone to figure your life out for you? You don’t. You only thought you did. What is needed is for individuals (that means you and me) to have a system that allows us to make proposals for things we want, and get other people on board with it. What could make more sense than that? If someone has an idea for an improvement, and can get a vast majority of people to want it too, then shouldn’t it be done? What better way is there than the people themselves agreeing on what needs to be done? What other reason could there be to get things done than what the people want?

Proposals will be practiced in the home as well as the public arena. In the public arena, the Egalitarian Proposal System would be an online service that would replace the congress. The people ourselves will become the congress. A system supports us in this way, it is easy, and it can be implemented within a month if we so decided. The technology is already available generically through survey software. As more people use it, the system would become more customized as people take it on and bring more skills to it.

In the home, parents would demonstrate this sovereign system with their children. They would encourage ideas to be made into a proposal and put to the family to vote on. But for the first time ever — children will be able to make proposals and vote just like any adult, if they can fulfill the criteria.

The Egalitarian Proposal System would facilitate this kind of freedom and so much more.

And it’s simple. Basically there are five steps to the Egalitarian Proposal System:

1. The sovereign makes a proposal

2. The sovereign opens the discussion period — (a) Includes details of the proposal — (b) Specifies the closing date of the discussion period

3. After the discussion period closes the sovereign — (a) reviews the discussion points — (b) prepares a revision of the proposal, taking new ideas into consideration.

4. The sovereign presents the revised proposal to a vote (a quorum must be met)

5. If the proposal achieves an 80% (or more) approval rate from a quorum then — (a) the proposal goes to the next phase — implementation — (b) If the vote comes under 80%, the proposal is unsuccessful. Another proposal can begin again from Step 1 as many times as desired.

The Egalitarian Proposal System is scaleable and can be practiced from the smallest of populations to the largest — it can be practiced in the home with the family, in schools, workplaces and in communities, campuses and just as easily it can be practiced by states and even continents (nations). Instead of voting for a person, we will vote for proposals. These proposals will be made by ordinary people or extraordinary people — it is for everyone. Anyone who wishes to put a idea or make a change to an existing convention or guideline has a way of bringing that forth. The idea of law — where a few write complicated volumes of restrictions upon others — will become irrelevant. Just like the manual typewriter, the system of government is for dinosaurs. It’s for people who want to be governed and to remain like children. Sovereigns don’t ask permission to be free, freedom is simply claimed unconditionally. The amount of money and energy spent in the political, money, financial, educational, medical and all patriarchal systems is ludicrous and beyond words. But most of all — it is totally unnecessary.

The Egalitarian Proposal System is open to everyone. Nobody is “banned” and further, true sovereigns hold censorship as utterly contemptible. Free speech is my right as it is yours as it is everybody’s. The Egalitarian Proposal System thoroughly upholds free speech as one of the two highest values. The other one most high value is that we must stop systematic killing of our own species.

The Egalitarian Proposal System is a system that can finally achieve that end. It is a dynamic system that facilitates changes so they can be made easily, but also with coherence. The coherence is achieved by requiring a quorum, and an 80% approval vote rate from the quorum. Without a quorum, voting is meaningless. An 80% approval rate ensures the proposal has widespread appeal, and acts as a checkpoint against totalitarianism.

Conversely, law makes no provision for change. Since nothing is more certain than change, why then do laws not facilitate change? For any system that is written, a system for change needs to be built into the very system itself, otherwise the system simply won’t be able to cater to change, and therefore it will lead to stagnation, low incentivization as well as dissatisfaction and grievances. Trying to change the law takes many man-years not just man-hours. If the law had legitimacy it would be simple to understand, but it is constructed almost like a language to itself, (legalese) and this then creates an artificial need for lawyers. The complications of law are simply manufactured and arbitrary. The idea of law itself is now a defunct idea because it was only constructed with a hierarchical, linear outlook. We need to move out of that receding structure and redirect our mind towards “horizontal” thinking, towards “equalamity”, and understanding that “you are another me”. In this system, everyone will be recognized as equally important. No longer will some have say over another. Everyone will be able to say precisely what they wish. That includes you…

This system can be practiced within this orthodox culture. No need to take anything or anyone down. It can be practiced by individuals, it can be practiced by groups.

In the Egalitarian Proposal System, everything will be decided by the people. No iffs or butts — no one has say over another. I emphasize — everyone will be encouraged to say whatever they wish.

Proposals that achieve an 80% approval rating pass to the next phase — the implementation phase. Its equivalence is something akin to a bill passing the senate. It is a check on widespread appeal and not just appeals to the few. The originator of a proposal lays out all the steps and details. The originator has the option of delegating a project management team if they so desire and provide details on that as well. All details necessary will be part of the proposal so that everyone can evaluate the soundness of the proposal.

The size of the quorum would be universal. It would be decided upon at the beginning of the adoption of this system. Even though the quorum is a foundational element of this system, the system has the flexibility for even elemental parts of the system to be changed. Everything in this system will be agreed upon between sovereigns. There will be no reason to have a third party to make decisions for us. However if one is required, a proposal can be made to do so in instances that it may be warranted. The public will decide if it passes. The public will replace judges and juries. This is how we create a new earth. When objections occur to any existing rule, guidance, principle, etc, it is dealt with by the objector producing a proposal. That objection will be the basis of a proposal that then goes to the people.

The objector would supply the reasons why the original proposal should be changed, and their idea of what would be better. The 80% approval rate is a check on the system, and another one is that the system operates in a fully open and transparent way. There would be no altering of data such as deleting data or changing it. In the case where data is needed to be altered, a proposal for that specific change will be put to the electorate. Everything is recorded as part of history. Data becomes human history, and data needs to be safeguarded from dictators who want to change it to manipulate history. In the current system, data is continually hidden, taken down, censored or omitted. This situation leaves us vulnerable and wide open to totalitarianism. The Egalitarian Proposal System has built in safeguards against this happening.

The website proposals appear on would list all proposals that are currently active. Proposals would be found by searching for any criteria that was specified. Proposals could be viewed as a list, or like browsing through a newspaper. The difference would be online and doable from the comfort of your own home. The most trending or most recent proposals would gain landing page privilege on the website. A search could consist of looking for proposals that are being carried out in your local area. Or proposals that pertain to new construction, or for green construction in your state, or green construction submitted by a particular architect, or green constructions that are using a particular material using a particular architect. The more specific the search, the more targeted the results. This is fast and accurate and saves people a lot of time. It uses the beauty of technology that is available to us today but that we are not utilizing.

Before long the idea of law would fade into history. Proposals would replace law entirely. Law deserves to go anyway, it is unwieldy, cumbersome and doesn’t make us safer. Its frequency signature is all wrong — it puts a few privileged people (ie: politicians, bureaucrats) in positions of deciding other people’s lives. And worse — it leaves those lives with no say in the matter.

Voting for a “representative” is not “having a say”, nor democratic, it is merely a smokescreen that allows representatives to have the full say on anything the representative desires while getting the consent to do so from the people who voted them in, and those are often a minority of the entire population. That is not a safe way of allocating power. Add to that the “Electoral College” plus the disorder of electoral districts and it’s all just one big mess. Voting for a representative is dangerous — for you as well as for me. Just because you voted for the representative doesn’t mean that the representative will sponsor bills that you agree with, or that I agree with because voting affects those who don’t vote or just as much as those who do. These bills that “representatives” pass to restrict our freedom come with the violent backing of enforcement units. And there’s nothing much you can do about it unless you want to fight it in court which could often take a year of your life, even in a diminutive case.

The assumption that a law can be meted out in all situations uniformly, allows no nuance for real life happenings and opens the way for tyranny to step in. No law can apply to every circumstance, that is plainly obvious, because each case, each moment, is unique. If law had everyone’s best interest at heart it would allow change to be made easily, especially when many people are shouting for change. And today, changes are easy to make with our modern technology. The only change that occurs in the law is when it discovers that people are getting away with some freedoms that the controllers hadn’t foreseen. Rarely do bad laws get annulled.

These systems today, are antediluvian, and no longer applicable to the age we are in — the digital age. Today we can do things a lot faster than during the 1700’s when the this current system was concocted. Laws are cumbersome, leaning toward the absurd. We could toss them away and just go by the Golden Rule and things would be no worse, and indeed would be better and we would save ourselves a lot of energy, money, time and disappointment. The law comes from an age before modern technology, even before cars and telephones, and during times when the population was illiterate. The notion of law is defunct and no longer applicable. Nothing is stagnant like law, it simply cannot handle the faster and more educated age we live in today. We need to move in another direction.

Finding proposals on the website would be like reading the newspapers — one would wake up and check in on the website, perhaps browse through listings of things they were interested in that day, as they sip their morning coffee. They could browse proposals that were current in any area or interest. They could join discussions that were being held on proposals, make comments and/or collaborate with others. One could vote on existing proposals, or decide to submit a proposal themselves. They could submit a totally new proposal or submit a proposal which objected to a current situation, or proposals that they thought simply need to be tweaked. It would be a world of proposals — and what could make more sense than that? A system that facilitates maximum freedom for everybody. This system allows maximum diversity with maximum coherence. It frees us of the slavery system and enables us to step into our sovereignty now. Only a slave asks permission — a sovereign simply claims what is theirs to begin with — their freedom. This freedom builds diversity, and encourages people to do and say as they desired. No longer will we be subjected to the whims of tyrants and tossed around without any say in our destiny.

There is no minimum age limit to both making proposals or voting on proposals. It would be in the proposer’s hands to submit proposals they wanted to see implemented and it would not matter what the age is. A child is just as free to make proposals and vote on them as any adult — and why not? It’s their future too.

Children would still need to fulfill the same approval rate as adults. But those children who have the penchant, and the aptitude are as free as anyone to partake in this system. What other system gives children a say in their future? The Egalitarian Proposal System is a system that benefits everyone. And is so simple, even children can do it.

Proposals would be submitted in the form of a video, an audio, or a written document. A successful proposal would receive a high percentage of approvals from the electorate by the number of votes it garners. The originator of the proposal would see their proposal through from start to finish. They are responsible for the promotion of their proposal and getting it out into the public. The infrastructure would facilitate the promotion of proposals. This system allows maximum freedom — in an orderly and systematic fashion.

The Egalitarian Proposal System revolutionizes democracy. It brings society into alignment with what the people truly want. The system itself still has to be constructed from scratch. But it is not hard to do. Many software tools are at our disposal already, it is a matter of putting them to our purpose. For example, survey software that currently exists could be used. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it would do in the interim until the new system gathered momentum through wider usage. Starting small is sustainable, starting in communities or organizations or even in small groups. Everyone could have a say and no coercion is involved.

This system is somewhat similar to a system called Sociocracy which is also a system for finding consensus amongst equals.

https://www.sociocracyforall.org

It is geared for face-to-face democracy whereas the Egalitarian System can be used face-to-face and online. To move to a more mature and robust system that supports each and every one of us, we need to shift from a hierarchical structure towards equality or what Sociocracy calls “horizontal power”, or “shared power”. Sociocracy organizes these concepts in an egalitarian way and has been used for some years in various organizations and groups. However the Egalitarian Proposal System requires slightly more formality with a simple yet detailed and clearly-structured methodology. It provides the data that will help us build a new science. The entire system openly records data and is fully public at all times (unless proposed otherwise). Openness enables humans to learn and advance. It doesn’t repress like the current system, but allows freedom of expression.

To emphasize — all data will be free and open in the Egalitarian Proposal system. A free and open system is like insurance against sociopathy — it leaves nowhere to hide bad deeds. Currently only a few government agencies have access to all data — they can see our data but we can’t see theirs. This will change with the new system — the withholding of data keeps humanity down, keeps us ignorant and ill informed. Nothing is more valuable than data and the controllers know this. Everyone behaves better in the open.

A new districting system is designed to work alongside this proposal system. Nothing will be done to change the current system — the Egalitarian Proposal System will operate in parallel to it. It will start small by people who want it and operate separately from the current system. The two systems will exist concurrently. For voting to have value, the districts need to be uniformly populated. The percentage that makes a quorum is one of the first decisions that will need to be decided. A significant percentage of the electorate must participate by voting, otherwise a very small portion of people could dictate their will upon others. This is why a quorum must be specified. People would be motivated to engage though because they would have a voice, at last. To encourage interest in a proposal, the proposer would learn the skills of promoting it. The system would facilitate the promotion of proposals as well. Everything in this system is through free will or voluntarism. Nothing is forced or coerced.

A ratings system could also be incorporated to indicate those who live up to their stated agreements and enable each person to build their reputation. This is how people of character will be known — people will want to do business with those who are trustworthy, those who have a track record of fulfilling their agreements. Trust is facilitated by the system because it shows the rating that others have attributed from their experience of activity carried out with the specific person. Today we never know what’s in the past of an individual when we have dealings with them. It’s hit-and-miss as to their trustworthiness. But in this system, those who give a rating can also be evaluated because all the data is open. Individual sovereigns would be rewarded for effort they take to develop their reputation. This recognition encourages more ethical behavior, something the existing system rarely does. A rating system can measure reputation but it must be emphasized that this is not similar in any way to a social credit system like the type in China. Think of it more like the five-star rating system seen on Amazon.com

We know it is important that a large proportion of the population take an interest in public affairs and of course they would because they have equal voice in the Egalitarian Proposal System. Therefore they would feel motivated to get involved. Empowerment invigorates interest and motivation. Having to go through the red tape and obstruction that governments and corporations put in our way today makes us feel daunted from the outset. That causes the stagnation we see today. Once we start using the new system, the colossal and ponderous machinations of representative government will fade away. Who would agree to be ruled when they can be the decision makers of their own destiny, the conductor of their own projects?

The Egalitarian Proposal System can start with small groups that start practicing it. The groups can be small or large but with practice anyone can see how simple this system is. We can have a say on everything. And as we practice it, our children will see us doing so and that is the best way of learning together the ways to unshackle ourselves from the existing system.

The belief that someone has power over us has to change. It is too dangerous to live in a world with this attitude. To even think that someone has power over us is again, part of the vertical way of thinking. For humans to survive we must now go horizontal and look to our peers. We need to be in a system where everyone has a say over their own lives. As we empower each other to do this, we will remove the tethers that bind us to dictators who have no interest in our lives but to control us. The new attitude will have a ripple effect that onlookers will notice and want to adopt as well.

It is a fact of life or perhaps physics, that what is not recorded is not valued. Think of the countless volunteers who for example, worked on constructing a building. Their names will not be recognized, their time not counted. For a sophisticated society that wants cell phones and aviation, we need to have records. The current paradigm is based on penalty for not complying — the new paradigm is recognition for doing the right thing because recognition naturally incentivizes. Presently, those who do the right thing, for example maintain a low pollution footprint, are highly disadvantaged because of the system that promotes waste and profligacy.

For those of us who do not agree to law (because they are made without and even against our consent) — the first step is that we declare our sovereignty. This must be announced publicly because it is a very exciting development to become sovereign. An online directory will facilitate this announcement. It will be like a registry, to use statist language. A directory will give sovereigns the ability to see who else claims their sovereignty and they can start making connections with each other.

Our task now is to decide things for ourselves in every decision. We don’t need to wait for others — that is the old babysitting system. We need to engage our peers. And we need a website to house the directories and the proposals. Each of us too, must be committed to bringing the awareness of this to others that we know, so we can start to empower them too. Those who wish to remain in the current system exclusively will of course still be able to, but they will see from our conduct and way of life, that the new system is easier, more balanced, allows us to fulfill our dreams and also get things done in a timely manner. We must also keep in mind that each of us is a unique individual and this new system fosters individuals to conduct projects in the way they wish to conduct them. To pass their proposals, they need to get the support of others, and isn’t that the most fair thing we could want?

This new system upholds absolute open source data, and totally repudiates censorship. Humanity stagnates when people are not able to speak their mind. Voice is what bestows power and in the current society, the ordinary person gets little to no voice while the privileged get all the voice. In a society of sovereigns, people are responsible for their own lives and their children’s. And the Egalitarian Proposal System would be the infrastructure that supports these ideals.

Nobody could come along and force someone to do anything. Force is considered barbaric and primitive behavior. We need to mature as a civilization. The idea of force would be viewed as contemptible and backward, a legacy from a by-gone era. If someone tried to exert force onto another, it would stand out, it would shock, it would be noticed and be frowned-upon, because the culture no longer supported it. The predatory culture would be no more because they (predators) would be the ones to be frowned upon. When a person has the freedom of speech to announce the names of those who do harm, that would be enough to deter sociopaths because they don’t want their names being known.

In the Egalitarian Proposal System, a person accused of anything would be as free to express their defense as anyone is free to make an accusation. Those with records of making false accusations repeatedly would be seen for what they do. Everyone has the option to reply at any and at every juncture, that’s what sovereignty and free speech bestows. A coercive person would be bringing that to their reputation — which would be public as everything else. Since all data is free and open in this system, others would know who the violent ones are. Or at least be able to question further — due to the openness of the system. When everything is transparent, people usually tend to be much better behaved voluntarily. Notice that you would be too. Anyone would be able to see who the sociopaths are. Sociopaths shun the light and don’t want people to know about them. Right now they can hide amongst the harmonious masses but with a free and open medium, they would be known, and they would be aware of that and that’s what would would keep sociopaths and psychopaths at bay. No other system acts as an antidote to sociopathy or psychopathy.

Voters could decide if the accusation was justified or not after hearing all sides. Wouldn’t you want this kind of protection if someone accused you of something? Those with good discernment would be noticed through the ratings system that would be part of each person’s profile. The rating system would be a key factor in helping to make accurate decisions.

Currently this new system begins in our minds. By envisioning what it would be like to live in this way is the first step to bringing it about. As to how we achieve it, we can begin by learning to take responsibility for our own personal lives rather than handing it over to total strangers (politicians, bureaucrats, officials etc). Living openly would enable everyone to walk freely in the streets, travel anywhere in the world without papers or passports, make our lives simpler, and free our time to pursue our higher purposes. Yet it would show accurately who has made harmful moves so we could decide to not do business with them. With this would also be available a path to atonement in order to give every sovereign a chance to improve.

The children of this generation would be the first to see and live this incredible change. Doing things in this way is freeing, organic and humane. It utilizes the technology at our disposal today, and provides the data that is needed to reframe the cumbersome, centralized system to a more localized one, based on trust that can be verified. Technology should be our servant not the other way around. Like nature, humanity will bloom exponentially when we can see that life is very much better when we are considered sovereign and not slaves. The mechanics of the Egalitarian Proposal System districting pattern is simple, and makes the most populous areas the central core, and lower population densities ripple outwards from the center.

Voting means nothing when there are wildly varying numbers of voters in various electoral districts. Large differences in electorate numbers gives denser populated districts a disadvantage over lesser-populated districts. We need to wean ourselves out of the existing system. Nobody will be hand-held in the egalitarian system — the system itself provides everyone with the structure to be their own sovereign and thus empowered to take initiative for themselves. When concessions are needed to be granted, for example due to disability, the concession can also be made into a proposal so that everyone understands each others expectations. We must be careful to not let concessions turn into enablements and dependencies. An equality-based system worth its salt would recognize discrepancies and have a method for rebalancing that would be smoothly handled.

The existing districting is totally chaotic and irrational. This devalues the vote results. The new districting system will be designed something like a pebble in a pond. The Central Business District, or the most densely populated area of a town or city would be the center. Let us consider a simple example by applying it to a town to get the gist of it.

Let’s use a medium sized town of 10,000 people. Children would be included in that number. Children as mentioned can make proposals and vote on them too. Let’s say this town has 10,000 residents. They decided that the CBD would consist of 2,000 people and that would be the central district. The next district would also consist of 2,000 people and the next district after that also. These districts are like ripples and could also be called “bands”. The bands would be fairly uniform in numbers of residents. There may occasionally be more or less residents as the difference of change over time but the number of residents would need to be adjusted to remain uniform.

Each band emanating from the CBD would get wider as the population became sparser, the farther from the core it was. There is no limit on number of bands — it depends on the population numbers. It would look very different in a city but the same pattern would apply. The CBD may consist of many CBD districts in that case.

In the Egalitarian Proposal System, the person who makes the proposal is like the CEO of a company. The proposer is the originator of the proposal and sees it through to completion and is also in charge of promoting the proposal and responding to inquiries. This would be done during the discussion period. This new system is virtually self-sufficient.

How to make a proposal

Let’s look at how a proposal is made.

Let’s say you want Roundup to be taken off the shelves in your town. You decide to submit your proposal as a video. In the video, you specify the length of the discussion period and other details. You state your proposal clearly — that you propose Roundup be removed from the shelves in retail stores. You state your reasons why. You may state that it damages the environment. You may recommend a better product. You may give opposing views and why you disagree with them. You may state better alternatives that don’t have the problems Roundup has. Essentially you would make as compelling a case as you could because, for the proposal to pass, it has to garner wide approval, something in the order of 70 or 80%. As stated before, the percentage would be a preset level and itself would be decided by proposal.

After the video proposal is submitted, the discussion period opens. Questions and comments would be heartily exchanged because for your proposal to pass, it has to have widespread appeal. During the discussion period you would hear comments for and against your proposal. This would give you a better idea of the overall appeal your proposal has and makes you aware of factors you may not have been aware of before. The discussion period enables you to see how you can adjust your proposal so that it can appeal to a wide range of voters for when you submit the revision which will be the final proposal before it goes to the vote.

The proposer would stipulate the closing date of the voting period. Voters could change their mind about the vote as many times as they desired, right up to the closing time. The proposal has to be written in a way that yields a yes or no answer, meaning — does the voter approve or disapprove of the proposal. It has to be very clear because unclear proposals would tend to receive rejection by the voters. Each proposal rises and falls according to the originator’s competence. But people will get good at communicating when this becomes an everyday occurrence. If the proposal garners an 80% approval from the quorum, it then advances to the next phase — implementation.

With the Egalitarian Proposal System, there will be no need for government buildings, courts, councils, or any decision-making bodies because it can all be handled from your computer. We could make proposals right now on what to use those government buildings for, as they will not be required to house the immense workforce that the existing antiquated system needs in order to keep us all like hostages. The Egalitarian Proposal System is a system for you and for me, and even for children. It will revolutionize society and in a way that empowers everyone. It will bring a new momentum of energy that stimulates people to action as it gives everyone their voice for the first time in human history.

This system would free up an enormous amount of time and energy, it would enable us to get things done promptly yet with coherence. We need to move faster in the digital age than we did in early American times, that’s the advantage of living in the technological age. No need to spend years fighting to change a mere bill. The Egalitarian Proposal System assures equality more than any other system and gives very little chance of a small group having domination over any proposal — they would have a huge task on their hands to convince the numerous electorates and individuals required.

The Egalitarian Proposal System changes our minds from thinking we have to wait for strangers we don’t know to make decisions that affect our destiny, to a system that hones directly towards people we can talk to and influence. Issues would be based on discussion, reason, debate and interaction. Everyone would have the same opportunity and that cultivates infinite variability and diversity. The Egalitarian Proposal System will make life easier, so that we can free our minds and thus put our energies to problems to solve, to new things to design and create, to travel and discovery, or to personal interests to enjoy. The Egalitarian Proposal System is a foundation for a new society and a new era. It gives priority to our birthright — our freedom to speak. It offers solutions that work for as many people as possible, while providing the structure that promotes originality and collaboration. It is a system that deters psychopathy and rewards excellence. It is the system for a new era in human advancement.