NWO open source government (metagovernment)

OK so the theory of NWO is (secret) societies having a master evil plan to rule the world more or less

Others contemplate on a NWO tend on the side of everyone voting or having equal rights which quickly gets flagged as commie, socialist or whatever is closest to the view of that particular theory.

Open source is the web based attempt at the latter where everyone is getting a vote. I have searched past discussions and the topic is flirted upon.

I come across metagovernment.org that are using some sort of wiki open source model trying to build an "direct democracy" where everyone vote counts and is implemented. This had no search hits on this site?

Its actually quite hard to navigate their site and even sign up or contribute and seems that they haven't had any meetings in over a year after 5 in 2010.

Im interested in that stuff I ended up on their sites researching my own thoughts. Im not sure I quite get how the open source works, I like some of the efforts and suggestions they have put into "standardization" but arguments arise such as this is chaos and wont work, the powerful societies will always rule, human nature will be corrupted by power, its a type of liberalist commie fantasy and so on?

reply to post by guidetube


James Madison:

"Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths...",

"We may define a republic to be ... a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people, and is administered by persons holding their offices during pleasure for a limited period, or during good behavior. It is essential to such a government that it be derived from the great body of the society, not from an inconsiderable proportion or a favored class of it; otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic." James Madison, Federalist No. 10, (1787)

Henry Thoreau:

"A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men." Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862)

That's all I have to say....

Very poetic and thank you for the reply.

I feel what you are saying is both the current and the suggested models are flawed? The current because the elite have to much power and the suggested open source because it is crazy to give power to the masses?

If so I agree

I've been talking about direct democracy from the internet for years now.

50% of the votes from elected officials and 50% from direct democracy by the population.

Now something like that, that would really deserve the title democracy.

Originally posted by guidetube
Very poetic and thank you for the reply.

I feel what you are saying is both the current and the suggested models are flawed? The current because the elite have to much power and the suggested open source because it is crazy to give power to the masses?

If so I agree

Yes. And paying particular attention to this part:

"...otherwise a handful of tyrannical nobles, exercising their oppressions by a delegation of their powers, might aspire to the rank of republicans and claim for their government the honorable title of republic."

Whether the current scoundrels prefer to call it a republic or not, we have been most excellently aced out of our Dear Republic. And believe me when I say that Democracy will not save it....

I didnt hit the key words when researching this or I would have posted my comments in the thread on ATS about "direct democracy". Here is a link to that thread:

Direct Democracy ATS thread

Seems like a good thread.

My feeling is that is mob rule favors the nations with the most people and will not stop the corruption of power.
I feel what metagovernment have started is commendable, particularly since they dont seem to be too directly pushing any agenda on anyone apart from "direct democracy".

Even if it does not work out we need people testing different solutions if we are to move forward with the times.

I see possibilities with online polling and voting however I dont see "direct democracy" as a solution to the current set up. One of my main problems with governments today is they will say anything to get elected and once they are in they do what they want for a few years so long as it doesnt annoy the people too much they get away with it. I would like to see them accountable for their agendas, possibly even a new vote on changes to agendas and other changes to the set up being introduced.

Its a difficult subject. We can see the West as positive and negative (safe but selfish for example). We have the poverty in some nations but would us giving up what we have help them or only make us and them worse off. We need to have our freedoms to push the boundaries but when we push to far or fast there is dire consequences.