It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New political system: Chaocracy

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 22 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Peter J. caroll wrote about the concept of Chaocracy.
With the current worldly financial crisis, and Governments feeding the corporate sector billions of dollars; it seems humanity needs a new leadership system.
The concept is simple, but the potential enormous.




posted on May, 23 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 


Hmm...interesting idea... i like it. Give the people power over their own lives again, instead of voting a lame hot-head or an ever-smiling backstabber into office. Randomness = higher quality representation.
When can we start?!



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Remiel
 

Hi Remiel, thanks for answering me on my first ever thread!
I don't know when this model could be used- my guess is the world will have to rid of quite a few oxygen wasting politicians and the like first; for this sort of thing to be even considered.
Look, I am not advocating that this would put an end to corruption, we would have to implement a different system to the monetary one (like spoken of in Zietgiest).
I read about this concept in Peter J.Carrolls book: PsyberMagick: Advanced Ideas In Chaos Magick many years ago, and it made me dwell on the alternatives to Democracy; this is the most attractive alternative I've seen.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Chaocracy is a political system that surpasses democracy!


A legislative body is selected by random means.

This body contains people of all sexes and ages.

A civil service will advise this legislative body.

One half of those chosen will be replaced by
random means every few years.


invented by Peter J. Carroll
and published in his book PsyberMagick


I like it! Simple, yet more defined than our current system at the same time.

Simple is always better.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Tentickles
 


Thanks tentickles!
The main problems with democracy as stated by Carroll are as such:
"1)we have to delegate responsibility for Govt., as most of us have better things to do for most of the time.
2)Nobody who wants political power should be allowed to have it.
3)De-electable bodies retain power by maintaining the interests of the status quo, and can't act with the impartial wisdom, that the luxury of time to govern could allow them to develop.
4)Elected bodies abrogate much of their power to people who act as monarchs, and then waste their time and effort in factional infighting"
fairly true to the way the state of our governments are, if you ask me- which is why we need this change.
the problem being, that current interests have such a strangle-hold within society, it would most definately be a blood-bath, to get them to relinquish power- we need the help of ETs.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 05:10 AM
link   
How does this surpass what we have? Which isn't a democracy, but a constitutional republic.

Sounds interesting but it gives very little detail, hard to compare it to any system.

So, do people at least get to decide if they want to be elected before they are randomly selected?

What if diversity is hard to come by and the random people chosen all have very similar views? Then what if the other set of people that watches over them end up feeling the same way, or at least the majority of them? Don't we risk having an insanely one party driven system that only represents a very short amount of the populace?



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 

Hi Rapin, heres a copy of the link if you've not seen it; you may have only read the post you replied to:

Chaocracy is a political system that surpasses democracy!

A legislative body is selected by random means.

This body contains people of all sexes and ages.

A civil service will advise this legislative body.

One half of those chosen will be replaced by
random means every few years.
invented by Peter J. Carroll
and published in his book PsyberMagick




How does this surpass what we have? Which isn't a democracy, but a constitutional republic. Sounds interesting but it gives very little detail, hard to compare it to any system.


It would surpass what we have, as what we have is hopelessly corrupt. You like "constitutional republic", I like Democratic Communism; until there is a referendum (so to here in Australia), only then ,if passed by democratic process (which is corrupt); then we have a republic.
Until then its Democratic Communsim. Why? Because you only think you have a political choice.
Its hard to compre with any system, because I'm am not even sure if a system such as this exists.
We need a legislative bodyselected by purely random means. Reward them with wants and needs to put them beyond corruption.Replace one half, of those chosen by random means every few years.
It i simplistic Rapin, I agree. All great trees, begin from a seed

If you can offer a better alternative; please share, this was the purpose of this thread.
thanks.



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 05:38 AM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 




It would surpass what we have, as what we have is hopelessly corrupt.

We could argue this is the fault of the people and not the system, people can corrupt anything.


Until then its Democratic Communsim. Why? Because you only think you have a political choice.

I agree full heartedly, you're correct, we are not living in a choice oriented or freedom oriented system, but that isn't because Constitutional Republicans don't work and aren't a good idea, that's because we've gone away from that idea since we started, and we claim that we have become a "democracy".


We need a legislative bodyselected by purely random means.


While I think this idea could be perfected and end up as a good one right now it just raises too many issues, like I stated before. For all we know the randomly selected people could all have very similar views that do not allow for diversity in this new system, there is no guarantees of diversity when everyone is elected at random.


If you can offer a better alternative; please share, this was the purpose of this thread


I think we should have a constitutional republic that gives the populace more access to the government than we have. If we have evidence that someone has done something wrong or if someone does not live up to campaign promises, we are allowed the chance to vote them out. If we do not agree with the president's actions we should reasonably have the right to vote him out depending on the circumstance. That would be a good start.



[edit on 23-5-2009 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on May, 23 2009 @ 12:47 PM
link   
The biggest problem I see with these ideas is the human element. No matter what we touch, we screw it up. Democracy started out as a good idea until it became twisted and perverted into what it is now. I say do away with elected representatives, bring in the "Lottery of Election". Do away with political parties altogether, they serve no purpose anymore; Wonder if they ever did? Oh hell, just hit the reset button for mankind.



posted on May, 24 2009 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage
 





If we have evidence that someone has done something wrong or if someone does not live up to campaign promises, we are allowed the chance to vote them out.

Hi Rapin,
I know its a fools paradise to think that there would be an easy transition to a new political system; there is probably going to be a lot of bloodshed for that to eventuate.
The main simularity that I can see with principles set forth in your above quote are the fact that ( as our democracy would explain it); we have the opportunity to vote for or aginst, every four or so years.
This is a convenient entertainment, voiced by our political minions of the present.
Based on other Republican models: such as South Africa; this does not ensure freedom from corruption.
I dont know whether Chaocracy would indeed be the solution to our political woes, I do know we need to consider something else though.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 02:30 AM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 
...but we have an incredibly large amount of almost-identically minded thinkers in this country, as exemplified by our two-party system. How would this be different from the dynamics of any city council or state senate? Furthermore, what happens when you hit the randomize button, and come up with X democrats and Y republicans (or liberals/conservatives) that disagree on all issues? Or if you come up with ONLY people of a single political persuasion? Or anarchists? Or activists for a single issue ('Climate change is coming! Divert ALL FEDERAL FUNDS into alternative fuel or we will all die within 30 years!!!!!')

No. Never mind whether the constitutional republic is a better choice over democracy. I would say that meritocracy, however flawed, is better than such random government.



posted on Jun, 13 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Zomgoose
 


Hi Zoom, thanks for the input!
In a Chaocracy we wouldn't have the ideal of Republicans/Libs; so its probably not appropriate to make a comparison.
This needs to accompany a whole new paradigm in human existance. I admit that as you have said there are seemingly so many similarly thinking people; but thats the illusion of Democracy. The main illusion being that we have too much choice, and need the government to step in and 'save us from ourselves'.
The Government, of coarse ultimately chooses, what choices we have!
Bit of a twister I know, but true. Democracy only differes from communist ideals insofar as, making us believe we have a choice!



posted on Jun, 14 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Hold on, are you saying that the only difference between what we have and communism is that we also have the illusion of choice? How about the complete lack of communal resources, or the fact that we actually have moderates and conservatives (with political power), and a capitalist economy?

Also, I don't see how it's possible to have a government without parties. Eventually, people who agree will team up in government against people who disagree with them, and pool money to help each other out. That's pretty much the basis of a party. It's human nature.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join