Democracy 2.0

A simple, legal way to put power in the hands of the people.


1) As silly as it is to type this out, the biggest problem with digital direct democracy would be that old people don’t trust the internet. We want everyone to have a say in society, but they won’t know how to use this technology and will use their current control over society to suppress this system. Even worse, the people with a lot of power may try more violent tactics to suppress this system if it grows too powerful. This is the point where we must hope the police and military stand down. It’s not like anyone can suppress a truly good idea anyway.

2) The second biggest problem is probably people not quite understanding how the system works. Everyone fears what they don’t understand. Hopefully the FAQ will answer any questions people have. If there are any others, please leave them in the comments. The most important concept to remember is that D-2.0 is a tool to decentralize decision-making power to entire communities, not a new government in and of itself.

3) As for people gaming the system, that’s always going to happen. Fortunately D-2.0 counteracts this by firmly giving control of each piece of legislation to its creator while still allowing others to edit and comment on edits. Then it firmly gives control over whether or not to pass the legislation to everyone who cares enough about the issue at hand to vote. There are no middlemen, no wealthy lobbyists. Just people and their ideas. I think it will be pretty difficult to game a transparent system where emotion can be completely removed from the conversation.

4) It’s sad, but another possibility is that no one steps up to the plate. No one fixes society’s problems and entropy transforms our place into a wasteland. I doubt this will happen, especially if you can do it in the comfort of your own home, but it’s still a possibility. Then I guess we really deserve whatever fate we are given by stronger people, or whatever the puppet leader decides to do. It’s important to remember that D-2.0 is flexible. It can be used by anyone alive who claims to be a citizen of a given place, including current leaders. In fact, it could help them do their job more efficiently. Or it can be used by small, tight-knit communities. When it is demonstrated to work in small communities, D-2.0 can be used with larger and larger states until the world is unified, and divided, in the manner most people so chooses.

What is the best way to govern?

This question has been asked time and time again throughout history, but let’s just start with what our founding fathers said about it. They wanted a government for the people by the people. They wanted the ability to amend and constantly rectify their laws. They wanted a democracy in which votes are used to determine the best choice of action, but they only considered wealthy white, male landowners to be capable of making intelligent decisions. They wanted congressmen to be elected to represent the interests of all the people who had no time for politics. Why did they need congressmen to represent the people, even the small amount of official citizens they had? Because it was logistically impossible to hear from every citizen, amass a huge database of their preferences, and respond accordingly. Entities in the US government now have that capability, but they’re using it to spy on their own citizens. And even without the Utah data center, these problems are easily solvable with instantaneous global communication and a couple of servers. In fact, it could start as a subreddit.

We know what politics looks like nowadays. A bunch of people in suits arguing. Talking heads. Talking points. People making “power plays.” Politicians with warchests of money. Attack ads. Alliances. This is not government. There’s no governing involved here. There is a childish game being played called politics. As strange as it may sound, we need politics out of government. When people say they want “money out of politics” they mean they want bribery out of government. This of course is not what our forefathers intended, nor what the majority of society wants: individuals with the most money controlling all of society. Direct digital democracy takes the power away from the rich and gives it to everyone participating in the system. The rich still have wealth, but they can’t control an entire community using bribes nearly as easily as they can now. Furthermore, there is no time or energy wasted running election campaigns. People with good ideas can immediately get them realized without needing to be charismatic or rich. All anyone needs is an internet connection and a computer.

Inject crowdsourcing into the bottom of the pyramid

With D-2.0, all of these organizations still exist, but society does the governing of society instead of these wealthy institutions

Once society is run using D-2.0, communities can begin experimenting with different governing systems. D-2.0 is not a utopian system in and of itself. It does however allow decision making to be more fluid by putting decision-making ability in the hands of society. If you are familiar with thermodynamics, you probably are aware of the phenomenon known as diffusion. Diffusion is the random movement of particles in a system that causes that system to naturally reach an entropically favorable state, without the input of any additional energy. In order for diffusion to occur, one must remove barriers that keep particles in a given system. Diffusion isn’t just for thermodynamics though. A bee randomly “diffuses” through its environment to locate flowers. It doesn’t matter what direction it moves in; the longer it diffuses through its environment, the higher the likelihood that it will find what it wants. If you contained the bee in a small environment, there’s a low chance that it will find the flower it needs. In a similar vein, imagine civilization is the bee. The movements the bee makes in search of the flower correlates to the legislation civilization passes in search of utopia. By removing the barriers to creating laws, civilization will eventually diffuse into utopia. Keep in mind that legislation that benefits one society by no means is the silver bullet that benefits all societies. We need to have the freedom to choose how we want to be governed.

Different laws work for different groups of people. The title of this post is a trick question: there is no one best way to govern. D-2.0 isn’t a government system so much as a way for society to create and agree on its own laws. It can be used in any existing government where leaders are elected or even appointed. All the “leader” has to do is pledge to execute any legislation passed via D-2.0 in the existing system. If this decision-making technique proves to be useful, it will spread naturally. If it’s not, it shouldn’t be used in the first place.

Look around.

OWS. The Black Bloc. Clampdown on internet freedoms. Indian and muslim women speaking out against their oppressors. Every country with military is flexing their might heavily right now. Deutschland is demanding its gold back from the Federal Reserve. Alternatives to the Petrodollar exist. The passing of NDAA 2012 and 2013. The legalization of marijuana in America. A military suicide rate of at least a soldier per day. An unemployed percentage of 40%. Drone strikes. A god-damned The Punisher style superhero in real life.

There’s an exponentially rising tide of unrest worldwide. Ask any expert in societal structure or any average person on the street and they’ll tell you: the existing system is simply not sustainable. The writing is on the wall: something will give and a global revolution, whether fascist, anarchist, communist, or something else, is about to unfold. Democracy 2.0 is that something else. This idea is basically open-source legislation + internet voting tied to physical identity = democracy 2.0. This is done by decentralizing decision-making power to everyone the community who is willing to be held accountable by providing their physical location and real identity, something we all do for the existing government anyway.

This means there are no leaders in hacked democracy. Then who makes decisions? Every citizen in the state entity that votes. Then who makes the legislation that we vote on? Any citizen in the state entity that wants to. Then who does all the physical tasks like city maintenance? We pass legislation to privatize the whole thing. Using the democracy 2.0 system, we can use the system we were born into by electing new leaders that are part of the D-2.0 system. I like to call this “democracy 2.0” because we it’s the next logical progression in how humans govern themselves.

%d bloggers like this: