I have read a fair bit of science fiction. I like the new technologies, new worlds, new human-like species, and interactions between humans and those species. In “Intergalactic Rock Star,” SF writer Opher Goodwin invents a vulva-pocked alien that takes sex to a much higher level for human males — even too high for promiscuous rock stars of the future.
SF writers often lead readers to future societies resolving political issues. Yet despite all their over-active imagination, SF writers cannot look beyond models of governance of today’s and yesterday’s Earth. SF readers will find the various versions of oligarchies, such as dictatorships, monarchies, one-party states, and puppet politicians being pulled from behind the scenes. If the future society is democratic, it will have political parties, noisy elections, influence peddlers, misguided voters, and politicians jockeying for higher positions. These are features of today’s western democracies.
Why can’t imaginative SF writers go beyond the known political systems? Perhaps moving beyond these political systems is an unpopular opinion?
My Alternative Democracy
I spent six years as an active volunteer in a Canadian political party. I saw enough dysfunction in the internal workings of this party to realize that I was not making a better world by being involved in this way. After a lot of pondering on how to alleviate this dysfunction, I somehow invented an alternative democracy. I have called this democracy “Tiered Democratic Governance” (TDG).
Here is a brief description of the TDG. First, it has no political parties or noisy election campaigns. Second, voters vote for one of their neighbors into the first tier of governance, using “good character” and “capacity for governance” as their criteria for casting a vote. Third, representatives of the first tier will elect the second tier in a similar process. Fourth, elected representatives are trained to work in a culture of consultation, not confrontation to resolve issues. And last, the elected representatives are guided by an advisory board to help them reach those consultative decisions.
This new democracy sounds too simple to be true. But explaining it further is beyond the scope of this essay. Rather, this essay will show that discussing an alternative democracy is an unpopular opinion.
An Unpopular Opinion
I have been on Medium for almost four years. I enjoy the higher intellect and skilled writing on this forum. I have learned many new things and got good book reads. But my main reason for being here is to promote the TDG to Medium contributors. I believe I have engaged with at least 3,000 people during this time.
How many Medium contributors have taken the TDG to the next level?
Let’s just say next to zero!
I have acquired about 50 tepid TDG fans. These fans seem to like the TDG idea. They sometimes tell me, "Go ahead and build the TDG, Dave, and I will join later.” Sorry, the TDG must be built by “we, the people.” There is no political messiah!
One TDG fan, Francesco Rizzuto, puts in an occasional reference about the TDG in his own Medium writings. He has been the only recent contributor with this good intent.
You could assume that with so many people who recognize that while there is something terribly wrong with democracy — especially the American version, a natural outcome would be for such people to investigate an alternative democratic system?
Sorry, 99.99% of those 3000 Medium people say they cannot put in three hours to read about this new TDG way.
Why?
Maybe because suggesting an alternative democracy is an unpopular opinion?
If that is the case, then our grandchildren and great-grandchildren are not likely to progress politically from where we are today. We will cling to a system that matured in the 19th century. Today it seems to be evolving into something worse.
If we want to move forward, we will need to overcome our reluctance to this unpopular opinion:
Western democracy needs to be replaced by a better system. I am suggesting the TDG.
Published in 2022
Book Review: What Left and Right Really Mean
