Publisher's Synopsis
The Vision on How Things Will Become, Best Case Scenario takes us to a scenario that could one day in the future come true, where some of the historically most persistently authoritarian countries ever to have existed, [think RUS CHN SAR NKR SYR AFG TUR BLR TRK DRC ZIM MYN EGY LBY SUD QAT INO & UAE] set up what can only be universally agreed is really the best democracy ever to have existed.
This will be the first time in human history where each and every element of how the system will work, what's on the constitution, how the ballot and how we convert the votes cast into seats and everything is decided by the people, in referendums or in 1% of all polling locations mini-referendums (much cheaper to run and will end up with the same outcome - each side gets to eliminate 20% of locations based on usual locations' voting patterns and one of the other 60% is chosen at random as the settler of the issue voters), resulting in the first-ever set-up in the world where the people and not the executive legislative and judiciary have the real power to make all sorts of changes. In more ways than one, this new way will go above and beyond what any other country has ever done, bringing about not just a truly unique but also a deeply superior new way of setting the electoral system up. It takes us beyond the usual issues and solves them all in deeply thoughtful and insightful ways. We allow continuing possibilities to change the system further, democratically, once things have been tried out and lessons learned. The old rulers get a good retirement and send off, so this is not a antagonize, kill and overthrow war scenario, but a gradual (maybe 3% per year until, one day, 100% of the say goes to this new way of doing things). Our regulators are tasked with ensuring that there is no way the press, media, or any one person company or grouping of any sort could ever get anywhere near as influential as we have seen in the past, a problem that is solved with a combination of rules, market share maximum caps, revenue caps and break-ups of the big players into several smaller players, beginning with the main ruling party of the pre-changes state. Among the ideas to build into this optimistic (utopian) and grandiose book is that maybe rather than have a right and a left, it would be better to have competing political parties for all the people born on the seven days or the week, the 12 months of the year and the 31 days of the month (merging 30 & 31 into one grouping), so you start out being automatically a member of three of these like for example the Tuesday + September + 21st groups, and can pick any of those to apply for a party-leadership-team place/job/seat to work in the leadership with OR can apply to join any of the others (max one incoming selection per party per year allowed worldwide). This way each grouping is more likely to come up with recommendations that are not unworkably far apart and the factions are not so violently critical of each other, as the parties are so much better able to work together. Would this world end up containing a lot of leadership systems where one grouping still gets enough power to implement all their promises (but this time legally obliged to stick to the promises it made!) or would there be a deadlock of smaller groupings, each having to try to call a mini-referendum to settle the fact that their brilliant idea was never backed by the others? We have gathered many more ideas to go with each of these and am passionate about thinking up a better tomorrow's world by combining all the good ideas together and then showing how much better the outcome is.
