Why would people disregard the idea that the human condition can be improved?
Why would people overlook the opportunity to help improve the human condition?
Recently I posted an unpopular opinion about replacing western democracy with a new democracy.
The article above tells about my engagement with about 3000 Medium contributors about this idea. They have — en masse — spurned this idea.
In this article, I will express another unpopular opinion related to the rejection of this new democracy.
While my alternative democracy — Tiered Democratic Governance (TDG) — has not gained the traction it should be getting in these turbulent political times, it has garnered some interesting commentary. Much of this commentary can be summarized as follows:
Dave, you are asking too much from humanity. We don’t have the skills to make your TDG work. Our human nature is too low.
True, it is that the TDG requires a higher level of governance than we have today. I will just outline the main attributes we have to acquire:
1) Voting is to be based on good character and capacity for governance. Today, we mostly rely on partisaniship, ideological association or celebrity status to cast our vote.
2) Elected TDG representatives are to employ a consultative decision-making process, which requires combining knowledge, experience, and wisdom of differing opinions into one unified decision. Today we champion our own ideas forward while working to defeat other ideas.
3) Citizens outside the TDG decision-making process will recognize that the TDG electoral process finds competent people to be in governance. These representatives are using consultative processes to reach effective decisions. In other words, citizens will be more accepting of decisions that seem disagreeable. Today, citizens often degrade and denounce public decisions.
4) No one can predict the outcome of any TDG decision. So all decisions will require monitoring for effectiveness. The decision is allowed to play itself out. If the decision requires changing, the TDG will change it out. In this way, a decision will be recognized as a failure when it fails rather than because of a continuous opposition trying to undermine it. Today, bad decisions are allowed to fester: advocates won’t admit to failure, and other pressing issues usually override the need to fix a clear mistake.
In my TDG book, I explain these points and a few others in a more detailed way. But I can already hear most of you saying:
Dave, this TDG is impossible. Humanity does not and cannot work like this.”
Also, in my book, I am quite clear that if the TDG were put into the position of final authority and responsibility today, it would fail rather quickly. In our current culture, most of us have highly charged opinions on various societal issues, and we prefer to shout over the people we disagree with rather than listen to them. We will have to cast this attitude aside.
So my book explains the forum where we can learn the skills and attitudes to make the TDG work in a TDG way. That forum will be building the TDG itself. Early TDG builders must consciously and deliberately develop and practice this new way.
When we are building the TDG, the issues are not so life-and-death. For example: “Should our local TDG have four, five, six, or seven members on the executive committee?” No early builder is going to get into a fistfight over this issue. But everyone at this meeting should give their opinion, and everyone should listen to understand why other members think differently. When a consensus starts forming around one of these numbers and the disagreeing members yield to that consensus, this is all well and good. When this yielding happens, the executive committee members are building a positive relationship with each other — and that will be useful for future decisions.
Another benefit to this frank and open discussion is that the early TDG builders will be finding innovative solutions that no one could have seen by thinking on their own. When the early TDG builders start seeing the value of changing their minds as new facts and perspectives are presented, this is a good sign that a consultative mindset is forming.
In time and with maturity, the TDG will move its growing consultative skills from self-governance to advising society. First on small issues, then bigger issues. While the TDG still has no authority and responsibility, the public will see the wisdom coming from the TDG — and wonder why the established authorities are not taking the TDG’s advice.
Once again, I can already hear readers saying something like:
Dave, this TDG is OK when it is small. But when it starts being influential, the people with little consultative skills will take over, leaving the TDG to be run similarly to a political party.
That is indeed a good comment.
And that is why the early TDG builders must understand that while they are building a new electoral system, they are — more importantly — building a new culture. How they build that culture in its early days will reflect on how the TDG handles the overly ambitious people with questionable talent who are looking for advancement in a more influential TDG.
Most of the TDG voters need to recognize that ambition when they see it — and vote for someone else more suitable for TDG governance.
Here’s an example I’m sure will play out in some TDG communities. Let’s assume one member is rather insistent that the number on the executive committee should be four. Her reasoning is fewer people in government is better. She has no interest in other opinions and insisting her opinion is the only way. She is somewhat annoying at the meetings as she repeats the same point each time she speaks. She doesn’t get her way — and the constitution is ratified with the executive committee consisting of six elected members. She remains vocally opposed to six.
Her behavior should be a good signal for someone not to vote for the executive committee.
She would still be a TDG member. She will still have voting rights. She will still have her say in TDG meetings when the executive committee meets with the general membership. She can still bring up her point that four is better than six. But if the right culture is developed, enough voters will recognize that her rigid attitude is unsuitable for TDG governance. The culture of the TDG will find more open-minded people.
In other words, if the early builders build the right culture, the forces that want to subvert that culture later will find their efforts to be futile. Some subversives will be frustrated and leave; some will acquire a more TDG-like attitude as they see the example working so well.
Admittedly, I have digressed a little too much. Here is my position for writing this article.
I believe humanity can gain these skills and attributes to make the TDG work. Building the TDG will be the forum for this to happen. With this practice, we can get better at consensual decisions.
And this position is, unfortunately, an unpopular opinion.
Published on Medium 2023
Mysticism of the Three TDG Novels
