QuoTinG dLiberation "But this is Europe, the birthplace of democracy - a continent now (bar the aberration of Belarus) made up entirely of democratic states, where universal suffrage is the rule, where democracy is considered not just as the best form of government, but as a fundamental right.

How then can this apply to the EU whose legislation is replacing many of the laws that used to be passed by national governments? Is it write to talk about “the will of the people”, the central idea underlying democratic systems since the days of Solon of Athens two and a half millennia ago, when there are many peoples? Today we understand democracy as a constitutional law-based system with fair voting, a system that prevents the tyranny of the majority and protects the fundamental rights of individuals and minorities.
But at an international level doesn’t this simply hollow out democracy itself?

Article on “Generation Binding Silence” :: New Global Democracy Formula

Article on “Generation Binding S’ilence” :: New GlobalDemocracy Formula

 

hollland , jan 4, 2007

 

00 / V :: Concluding Article “Shift in Voting ::Democracy Catalyst”

( here the concluding article out of a narration following analysis construct )

 

Since 1990 a new way of managing, maintainingand sustaining democratic representation core in line with the peoplespreference is mediated by a dutch reformer. Regarding the conventional way of voting, known as One man One vote incombination with a vast confidence instatistical proof of mass events, this new way of voting relies on parameters that are all at stake in thecollective sphere. The originator named thisnew way of voting, that very likely can be an answer to the Einstein Quest“another way of thinking”, in 2000 “generation binding” and since recent “generation binding s’ilence”, referencing both matrix and spiral mechanisms included in this “mass mind model”.

 

Buildingthis article with the originator in order to reveal the mechanism to the people,let us pass the questions:

·       Why do we need this?

·       What thought emerged this?

·       Where do we, the people, gainfrom it?

·       How do we implement it,

·       or before that, how do weconvince one another on the pivotal esteem?

·       Can you tell us about somerefinements?

 

Why do we, people of a nation, need this?

 

Ispectate this world and the competition at vast scales beyond the human personal mind thatpulses into all our lives, in all our nations = nations that I see as clustersof individuals living in a sort of controlled area, intentionally self-managing,maintaining, sustaining the standards of their people. Now, in those years weseem to be in a kind of harness thatdoesnot resonate the human creative friction we somehow suppose as general human fundaments. Let me share acomment of Jan Roelofs, a partner working in my learningspace iGovernance &iPolitics (i=integral). He quoted an article about religare groups recognizedin an investigation in the Netherlands 2006 – just before the november 2006 elections.The largest group is 26 percent of people, individuals, who quest their ownindividual spirituality … So this group is not represented by any politicalparty. I can be an option to think thatthose people do not affirm the system we live in anymore! Do you reader read me, here right now? Okay, I know I amdrawing a quick however very strong line if you see it from the side of abooming trendline.

Do thenotions of mr. Ken Wilber in Boomeritis synchronize with those trends?

Is therethe thought that he is in favour with the city of Amsterdam, in short A’dam (were you awareof that signal of connection)?

And to beclear from my personal engagement isn’t that right in the middle of the Rosewhere I live with my public company Waternet , where the elite positions thecompany as a water-cycle service company serving waste, surface and drinking water and I propose to them tomake it an integrated water-cycle service company where the human factor isfully implemented in the focus of the wisdomboard?

What thought emerged this?

Let mefirst draft the circumstance that sort of struck my life in the time that an ideaentered my visional mind. By occasion I wasemployed with BSO/Origin, a former dutch information and software company, andjust a year after visiting Frances Bicentennial in 1989, I was asked to co-member my political party in the localcouncil. So, what am I saying here … my open mind was in a sort of creativefriction with History, Democracy and Technology.

So, whatthought emerged the awareness of Shift in Voting :: Democracy Catalyst?

I wasliving in 3 worlds, and in the same period I experienced all kind of communication chaoswith my fellow humans :: sort of loosingmy communication (fibres)…

Iinvestigated this all the time relying on my strong beliefs … I even noted downa list of 12 persons that “deserved” my full trust … and every now and then Ireplaced one by another one = think, confirming my self-development.

So I wasall the time practising a new kind of “voting”, which is in my strong belief acore for decision making for all humanspartaking the “world order”, the spaceship “earth”.

 

Simplestart for the vision was the thought : can everyone get 20 points to assign to aselection of at least 3 individuals that gain by my decision my trust to be ina fruitfull team on political interests. My selection, and the ability tochange that selection at any time, should set my focus on the playgrounds oflocal politics and exercise my brainframe on global affairs.

 

An illustration document on (collective) decision making qoutated:

Can two decisions that contradict eachother both be good.?

Surprisingas it may seem the answer is - Yes.

Thereason is simple: different patients have different priorities; some prefer life with

disability to death, while others prefer death to life with disability. Both decisions are

Goodfor those who made them, as they are determined by different priorities, not byfacts,

knowledge or logic. Different people have different priorities, and there is no absolute

priorityenabling us to grade all priorities.

Howdoes all this relate to politics?

Ispolitics about decisions or about conclusions?

Dopoliticians decide policy or conclude policy?

Inpolitics people vote. Voting is choosing. To choose is to prefer. People decide what to

prefer. Anyone deciding policy - King, Dictator, President, Prime Minister, Leader, or

ordinarycitizen - chooses one option from a number of options. We cannot choose a

conclusion. Answering What to do? is always a decision, never a conclusion.

Decisionsare determined by priorities, not by data, knowledge or reasoning. The same facts,

knowledge,and logic, can lead to different decisions due to different priorities.

Politicsis decisions, not conclusions. We decide political issues. We do not conclude them.

Those who make a decision are responsible for its results as they could make a different

decision(motivated by a different priority) and get different results.

Politicians whose decisions produce undesirable results usually try to evade their

responsibilityfor such results by saying I had no choice pretending their decisions were

conclusions. But they voted. Voting is choosing. One cannot choose a conclusion.

 

So, the individual conclusion

“ICH HABE ES NICHT GEWUSST”

maybe a notice of lack : lack of an appropriate methodology (system),

andthereby systematically promoting public ignorance.

Where do we, the people, gain from this newkind of thinking?

Honestly,I could not say that or proof the gain for a long time …

Sincedecember 2000 there a pivot happened: the magazine Ode organized an event wherethe Treaty of Bretton Woods was challenged to “our time”.

At thatevent an open space conference breeded the term “generation binding”. The termS’ilence is recently attached to those 2 words, replacing the modern scienceterm Matrix.

 

Let me share another Wilberian Type Quadrant private investigation:

 

humansense fields (by cosmic resonance)

See

Feel

Think

Touch

analogueto the basic perspectives :

I

It

We

Its

analogueto the public functionalities :

Behaviour

Physical

Cultural

Societal

 

I do notsay this is the truth, but it is a way of seeing & sensing a truth …

I sensethis can be a perception on general truth …

 

The5th Verb that reverberates is the verb :: force

“Heal”:: lightning

…which resonates on …

“Speak”:: sounding

 

this verbis like the thumb orchestring the 4 fingers (the Quadrant) …

they areall true and whole partakers in a field of cooperation.

Now, backto the question … I see and cannot think alone …

So,cooperating we, the people, accept our thinking as the new kind of human risingNOW.

Andthe philosophic notice may be

wegot beyond

Descartes“I think, so : I am”

 

;-) :: ( Heal :: See – Feel – Touch – Think :: Speak )

 

(canyou please think about this while seeing your world through our eyes?)

 

How do we implement it, or before that, howdo we convince one another on the pivotal esteem?

Convince?

I donotsense the effect of convincing,

I’ldrather stick to the word mr. Peter Merry (center for human emergence – the netherlands) sort of “invented” recently:

 

SYNNERVATE (just g**gle it).

 

Then, howdo we implement it :: have an international debate on this subject calling allstations to subscribe aglobal joint venture project and facilitate the PEOPLES DIALOGUE . In themeantime we get on building the tools just accepting the rough draftlines asthey are and bring it up. Not only as a paradigm for election procedures atnation or local community scale but also on schools and universities and big companies.

 

do youget the picture, pivoting all objections to the projects advantage?

Can you tell us about some refinements?

Okay, Iwill tell some:

1.    at a generation phase (considerlife generally split up in 13x7 yearzones) each human has a budget for votingon the national and the local scale, and to that provisionally on the globalscale.

2.    Each phase specific budget sticksto the rules that a maximum of 50 percent of the budget may be assigned to thepersonal favourite votee (term replaces the word public representative orcandidate on political issues). Meaning, everyone gets used to bring up a teamthat cooperates in the common field of dialogue ; say debate when the decisionsare mutually made.

3.    A voter cannot be a Votee, andvice versa …

4.    The generation approach definesthe act of the Votee to be recommendable for all humans, may I say here theworking class. So the kind of work the Votee does, i.e. loosing his job andbeing available a a public servant, is the ideal situation for all people.Reality says that only 5 percent of the people assign their talents on thatexposure.

5.    This system is built upon therequirement that the system works (why not?). So, at the end of a lifetime eachVoter has the same budget on Voting as the Votee = which is defined as ZEROPOINTS (youvote by acting mutual).

6.    The refinement conclusion is, ifI may say this, an act in the line of Praise of Folly, a short story on life byDesiderius Erasmus, it is about Dying, about being in the Fire. So, to allthose Votees we, the people say, you are my destiny in the sense of being inthe Fire without False Measure (=Voting & Learning to Manage).

7.    While every Voter can maintainthe personal budget on the fly of life, it may be of our notice that s/he isless drifting on mediation just before an election Day. So, is this anadvantage or is this a disadvantage regarding the seriousness of thecommunities truth and authenticity? (let my 7th refinement be a quest, okay!)

8.    Last refinement here, can be thequest on worldcitizen forum where one is investigating a global democracy andan instrument that guides all involved in a profound dynamic flow includingsynchronisation points as decisions are. Let me drop two options in thisbroadcasting article:

a.     this GBS’ilence paradigmdescribing an alternative for national and local elections replacing the oldone, one man one vote, can be a fundament for the Global Core Election bysplitting the budget in 2 parts: at most 50 percent of the budget may beattached to fellow country votees; and there is no restriction to thepercentage given to outer country votees.

b.    another approach given theGBS’ilence fundament can be the collective GBS’vote. A definition of acollective GBS’vote can be that the collective is a group of 5 (transnational)individuals that interacts willingly for at least 1 year in a sort of harmonic.Only group budgets can account in the Global Election Core. Any worldcitizen isfree to arrange a group that can be authentified. ( a rough and fresh idea :)

Is this now at the start of year 2007 theright time to shift from the old to the new method?

To me,this is the right time ; and really I did not even wait for this moment to come…

I livethis (hell of a) life … may I invite you to breath it in and out again andagain?

 

 

shortnote on the design beyond the article / conclusion

to myreaders :: author cees de groot / worldcitizen (germspot holland)

this article is widened serving readers planetary vastand various addresses;

which does not serve comfort for those who are aimingfor the articles focus.

overcoming this the author suggests to enter on nextsequence as a shortcut:

 

first step: 00 / V … second step: I-IV (10-13) … finalcontext: 0-13 & 00 again

 

(I see this structure as a way of Building Our Bridge Togetherlined up by/as a ROPEY )

 

00 / V ::Concluding Article “Shift in Voting :: Democracy Catalyst”

0 :: preface

0.1 definitions

1 :: purpose& destiny

2 :: challenge& work

3 :: service& devotion

4 :: form &construction

5 :: radiance& splendor

6 :: equality& eternity

7 :: attunement& communication

8 :: integrity& harmonic

9 :: intention& valuesystem

10 / I ::manifestation & history

11 / II ::liberation & digestion

12 / III ::cooperation & learning

13 / IV ::presence & dynamics

00 / V ::Concluding Article “Shift in Voting :: Democracy Catalyst”

Why do we,people of a nation, need this?

What thoughtemerged this?

Where do we,the people, gain from this new kind of thinking?

How do weimplement it, or before that, how do we convince one another on the pivotalesteem?

Can you tell usabout some refinements?

Is this now atthe start of year 2007 the right time to shift from the old to the new method?

 

0 :: preface

Author got a new vision on how to instrumentalizeelection procedures where masses of partakers as citizen in a democracy spheredecide upon their representatives in the collective core in a sensible way,i.e. in a way that builds democracy and their partaking members in a way thatcombines both inner pillars and outer buttresses (taking a cathedralconstruction as metaphor). Where the inner pillars are the partaking members ofsociety, the outer pillars are the universal forces that unify through time andspace. The latter will be in more detail expressed in this article. And if thereader senses this as not being articulated sufficiently, please notify yournotification or question to s.ace@orange.nl.

 

In order to enable a public entrance the article,attached to the more complex to comprehend design objectives and building blocks,is both in front and in the backstage of this document as a whole. Consider thedocument as just the “concluding article on a new way of collective citizenrelationship, previously known as the election procedure”, where thebuildingblocks 0 prefaces the whole and guides the reader and the blocks 1 to13 are added for those who deepdrill from the article to fundamentals “hidden”,cq. to be clarified in conversation with the author.

 

Some historic data that chronicles this adventure:

  • may 1985 :: nature speaks to the author – crack of a norwegian breen
  • fall 1990 :: the noospheric idea springs off into the mindsphere
  • winter 90/91 :: idea enters a trilogy responding “Has Everything Been Said” ( NRC )
  • dec 2000 :: treaty of noordwijk aan zee gives name to “generation binding” ( ODE )
  • okt 2002 :: European Complexity & Chaos Organization Network facilitates lecture
  • sep 2004 :: studious website GlobalGeniusVoter mediates what has to be revealed
  • year 2005 :: study of mental fitness & Tzolkin & “on courage”
  • march 2006 :: joining “klaar om te wenden” – “ready to ree” foundation & movements
  • dec 2006 :: symposium lucknow, india : Global Democracy (& Just ice)

 

The core of this article is the sphere were people andstate / global affairs meet in the decisional position that every now and thencomes up in the co-creative mutual sphere of living together.

0.1     definitions

some definitions on terms may clarify our mutualunderstanding

Matrix

A lineair or cube formed way of expressing …

as language / words / sentences

Spiral

A radial or sphere formed way of expressing …

as style / refinements / message inside the contact

Silence

/ Scilence

/ S’ilence

In this context the author uses the word Silence as a joint venture of both the matrix and the spiral forms deliberating mutual minds – www.globalgeniusvoter.com

Tzolkin

Mayan birth & 13moon calendar & wavespell – Revelation of the 2nd human earth cycle – www.lawoftime.org

NeuReeBah

Practical Meditation to create a Group Mind Centre

Wilber Quadrants

::

i/it/its/we

“But once having split from that wholeness, we can regain or recapture it, but now in a conscious, mature form.” Quoting Wilbers motive for 4Quadrants Meta Language :: (symbol)

 

 

 

1 :: purpose & destiny

In the decisional position every partaker, say herecitizen, needs exercise to grow in the most complex situation that mergestowards a new vision contributing the solution for the better life.

 

History review leads to the conclusion, often heard,that man did not learn much in the last 5000 years.

How come?

Or skip this queest for a better understanding in thisarticle onwards?

 

When reading this article please take notion of thefact of life that if a human gets 20 currency units to buy 3 products, s/he willsucceed; if s/he gets the budget of 100 units s/he will managed to buy at least11 products. Keep this general human skill in mind as deliberation factor.

2 :: challenge & work

Each new situation that occurs needs a fresh viewpointin order to communicate the “thing”.

To communicate the thing it needs some patience togather data and structure it to mutual consumable information.

The work to be done is, as we can agree upon shortly [1],a working on 4 perspective fields :: I –IT – ITS – WE ; more pronounced with the labels BEHAVIOURAL – PHYSICAL –SOCIETAL – CULTURAL. The context where this perspectives facilitate thedialogue is the field of dialogue, the interrelational core where the situationto be communicated arises. Mostly the problem is te be solved in the ITSquadrant.

Here the individual work seems to be served by theopen mind on the I-quadrant; on the digestive skills to disolve the physical,the IT-quadrant. On the collective core the work is served by the idea that thecollective individuals, the WE, gathered co-operate in the centered space wherethey all unite. This may be propagated by several tools and skills that allindividuals accept and learn, such as group meditations to set thecentersphere.

May it be clarified that a Work Process can only be ofsense if it Works for all participants.

It can also be stated that where it is often taken forgranted to accept the previous situation as a starting point for negotiations,it can also be agreed upon that the situation before was due to mismanagedpolitics or power systems mutually regretted that they occurred on pain.

3 :: service & devotion

In this design for a new peoples structure and dynamicon how to live in a (better, profound) world, we will see that equality is nota universal principle at the same moment to the same individual. In the core ofthis article, i.e. the voting system as a democracy building vehicle, we haveto forget about the idea brought into peoples mind by the one-man-one-votemechanism. Although it optically seems a very equal situation to allparticipants to get them on the political decision core by selecting arepresentative, seeing more to it from an analysis of the decisional moment …each individual voter was just provoked to force and cut personal favouriteoptions to a dogmatic choice of one person. And at the same time the Statisticalmass of all people should do the teamwork selection for the coalition cut.

So the new system builds on equality seen on alifetime of 13x7 years, where all citizen are equally treated regarding theelection, the decision making core. One will see this later arising in somedrafts.

4 :: form & construction

In constructing a mutual maze that makes sense in theorganic core where humans coexist, the design of the new paradigm builds blocksof 7 years (and 7 levels) as a generational phase in life. Although thosephases may not be exact in line with the human living a life, those blocks alltogether form a maze that leads the way onward simply as steps on a stairway upor downwards.

Constructing the new paradigm we have learned that itis a decision in life to step forward and enter the representative core presentas a candidate for other ones to speak for them. In the new paradigm,Generation Binding Silence – GBS** - we agree upon the terms Voter and Votee.This combined with the procedural rule that in an election procedure one can beonly a Voter or a Votee. (notice the difference with the worldwide known One-Man-One-Votethat gives us television shots of candidates voting – for themselves)

A 7 steps up and downwards “temple” gives people themirror of life integrated in a vivid democracy interrelation communicationchannel. On the metalevel this combines the formula of light, 7, and of sound,13.

5 :: radiance & splendor

Ancient Civilizations, often visited nowadays on aholiday tour enrichening the spiritual questing crowds dreaming their way back“in a hurry”, inspire individuals deeply.

The radiance of history overwhelms and illustrates thesplendour for what human specie can achieve when working together.

In this regard we often forget the circumstances howthe builders of those monuments lived in their time … uncomfortable andquestionable on the human standards of living we “westerns” mediate as ournationwide normative.

Nevertheless, sensing the sparkling signals revelatethe human mind every now and then as wonders to live for in peace and harmony.

The radiance can be sensed as an ever healing vortexenergizing the body; as a voice reverberating the body mind anytime speaking orsinging and even whistling through the field of silence.

6 :: equality & eternity

The essence of equality has to be in the GBSresponding to the gift of universal eternity which needs no human interference.

The gift of the Votee is therefore taken as the goalfor each voter to reach in a lifetime: live the life on the act of presence andaccept the role not to vote in the societal political election event. Whilethis rule is within the system where all people as citizen partake in their upmost collective contribution we can see the passing through of learning powerfrom generation to generation. The flow of life takes over the lead of communityhood.

7 :: attunement & communication

A pivot in the decisional moment is the awareness ofeach human partaking as a Voter (or Votee) that is caused through theimplementation of this system will be: the quadrant sense of governance ;governance sense against respectively dialogue, politics, democracy.

Next to this Quadrant 2 references to Ken WilberQuadrants facilitate this communication and understanding.

 

I

It

We

Its

 

Simply 4 perspectives that can be understood insociety contxt as

 

Behaverioural

Physical

Cultural

Societal

 

When we look at the context of domains, we see:

Mind

Body

Relation

Function

Here the functional includes the projectional andinstrumental human skills.

The relation quadrant merges by natural and implicitintelligent invitation mind, body and function spheres to the opencommunication realms and to the mutual quality level achievable in theabundance given.

 

On the decisional core of organisation we can rely on:

Governance

Dialogue

Democracy

Politics

 

All 4 Quadrants are here in line with one another,training the mindset of participants in a constructive collective constructionof a new way of dealing with mass, meshes and entropy.

 

So Governance is the stage where each individual actsfrom the consciouslevel where s/he performs the best skills as a voter or as avotee.

It can be agreed upon that getting to the higher selfstage of decision making on the governance core needs exercise. Therefore theGBS also implements the election event as a permanent show. Caution: thispermanent show may not be permanent on the output side of the whole. So pollsout of the, now permanent, base will only be available on a wider maze, sayeach month or each quarter. At the outcome side of shifts in peoples confidencein votees, ministres, congresman and other spokesman in the political arena wemust agree upon the sphere that the system is not interfering in the formulaeof power but preferred over that is: facilitating the communicational mutualsignals to voters and votees.

This all facilitating the attunement of thearticulations on matters that arise.

8 :: integrity & harmonic

If we draft a scheme of the GBS voting paradigm andmirror it to itself, the picture gives a thing as:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This draft combines a colour system practised by Mr.Don Beck on the theories of Mr. Graves on evolutionary spirals alive andcoexisting through our communities, where the turquoise field implies the`whole view` and the other colours build from the middle one, the beige,through all coexisting stages. More of this can be studied elsewhere usingkeywords SDi , Spiral Dynamics integral and Beck.

In this article this model overlaps the election modedesigned and regarded here right in this article.

9 :: intention & valuesystem

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This draft both describes the intention &valuesystem of human living state and planetwise.

How?

Consider the bottom line a the survival sensed stagewhere we start getting used to our bodies and either feed it to survive theenvironment or, at elder age, get beyond the body by accepting the starvationthat will come along.

The 5 colours purple, red, blue, orange and greenrepresent other evolutionary stages in human cultures all over the planet. Somemay not have been visible in some countries or spheres dominated.

The 2 colours yellow and turquoise represent theecological and the whole view stage that can be seen as the mature one, wehuman beings as citizens all are striving for to learn.

The system describes the yellow as the local stagewhere the human lives, and the turquoise stage where the human works. If youreader like to change those verbs, live and work, feel free to do so because atthe end of this article you may digest to the conclusion it is all the samewithin the context of co-operating the planetary sphere: it is both intentionand valuesystem while evoluting as human being(s).

10 / I :: manifestation & history

In order to make the changed perception on theelection core of democracy spheres clear, some things are to be viewed.

First lets again seen the One Man One Vote formulathat from a room with some guys deciding promoted to country spheres where awhole population decides on which representatives may take the lead on speech.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(each block represents a generation stage in life of 7 years)

The given draft represents the One Man One Voteformula where Grey means the particular Generation has No Vote Right and Red impliesGeneration has a Vote Right by assigning one vote in 4 years to one party, onecandidate.

 

The blank generation from 15 to 21 years of agerepresents the “gap” where some humans start at 18 years to vote and other onesat 21 years, this due to the electionfrequency of 4 years.

 

Stepping out of the Box one rises questions as :

Is it wise in the global community to outcast so manyyoung people from the election core?

Is there any lesson in the voting system while growingolder to wise elder?

Is a election calculation system only tested once aday in four years?

 

~~~

 

Do youfeel invited to be initiated in the new graph?

F1

 

 

 

 

 

F7

 

 

 

 

 

F13

 

 

 

 

 

 

E7

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A13

The yellow colours stand for the local electionprocedure, which is similar as the nationwide one that is described belowexcept for the beginning, which is 7 years earlier, for the ending , which is 7years later, and for the mid, which is the dissonant that brings in the Erasmusfactor, the wise crux “the praise of folly”as a systematic, on the human contemplative level a humoresque and digesting,advantage.

The turquoise colours resonate on the theories ofClare Graves Spiral Dynamics where this colour signals the “whole view”, the“integral worldview on mankind and relationships” as the author here prefers toarticulate this signal:

So what does it mean when a human becomes 15 years ofage (3th generation state)?

S/he gets a budget of 20 points to share in thepolitical decision core and at the same time on the individual citizeneducational core as integral partaker.

This sharing means that 20 point are assigned to atleast 3 Votees. The favourite Votee gets a maximum of 50 % of the votersbudget.

What does this mean?

Consider the situation that a man giving 1 point toanother one in the old paradigm … What happens?

The voter gives his political soul to the single Votee,and single political party.

Now, in this new design, considering the assignment toa team of personal preferred singles, what happens?

The voter places the higher self in the kernel of thisteam(!), relating the own stand to the votees chozen in a differentiatedteamwork.

 

Examples of 100% fulfilled votings out of a 20 pointspocket budget are:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The upper shows a voter having 1 favourite candiate,the second one has two equivalent candidates, the third row shows a voter whomanages to bring up a team of 4 and the fourth one of 5 equivalent candidates.

 

For the first time reader this may seem complex,however if we refer to the story of a consumer buying some, say 3, products forsay 20 euro … then this new procedure can be accepted in due time. Agreed?

For the next generations to come and the more detaileddescription of how this can be digested as a working system, see 11 / I ::liberation.

 

The new way of voting is available on any moment thatarises to a voter to maintain his personal budget, or political team of singlesworking together. Here it needs to be said that this availability option refersto the Input side of the Voting Bank; how to handle the Outcome o, the Poll, ofthis new way of maintaining the political bindings and unbinding on some kindof a frequency base depends upon the collective agreement (month/quarter/year).

11 / II :: liberation & digestion

The graph of the new election core shows two mainlines …

F1

 

 

 

 

 

F7

 

 

 

 

 

F13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A1

 

 

 

 

 

A7

 

 

 

 

 

A13

1.     in4 steps (C2-F7) a human raises in 29 years from a 20 points budget to a 100points budget

2.     in5 steps (F7-A13) a human dissolves in 36 years from a 100 points budget to a 0point budget

 

This needs some narrations and understanding of life,of the cultural, the societal, the dialogue and the governance perspectives.

The first context of raising in the budget for theelectional core seems reasonable because of the natural flow of a learning lifewhere man manages to get about in complexity. He learns the priorities to beset in the individual core, and family or network attached he learns toco-operate in missions or projects. So at the top level he manages to share 100points to a minimum of 11 Votees. ‘)

 

The second context of loosing budget is in fact thereason why this system liberates human world citizens as a whole organism anddigests collaboration for each human. Let’s narrate on the meaning of life …

Remember a constraint for this new way of voting thata Votee is a human being who puts the voter option in the core of acting. So,that human individual renounced his voter budget in favour for being a voterscandidate. Which we all honour. And because we honour this decision we all canagree upon the viewpoint that this is a strife for all humans engaged inco-operation. So at the end of our working life we can agree upon the state of levellingwith the Votees. This attitude is both referring to the stand in dialogues anddigestions and to the voters budget of zero points.

In promoting the acceptance of this last narration wemay agree upon the sense that adults over 50 were all there life busy to ratifytheir ideals in all kind of products and legislations where young ones have todeal with by changing them again. Because the products of life of the oldergenerations are alive in the societal sphere, and of ancient generations evenin the cultural sphere, the author here sets the statement that we have to dissolve our community built tothe future as even more conscious human being(s).

 

‘) NB. here it is to be announced that the system deals with theabsolute minimum of 3 Votees on all levels. A soft penalty of 2 pointsis then systemwise raised for the number of votees the voter did not manage toselect.

Example: if you are in section 5 (age 29-35), you‘ve got a budget of 60points to share with a minimum of 7 votees; however you can only select 5votees in your team … then the system gives 2 penalties of 2 point … so thevoter can share 4 points less than the budget to the 5 votees selected :: 56i.s.o. 60. The penalty fee can be understood as a challenge to find all voteesmatching the personal coalition force.

Another example at the top level of 100 points: the voter only selects 3votees, then 8 votee options are given soft penalties of 2 points each; votersbudget is 84 point in stead of 100.

The meaning of the penalties is to simplify the practise with the systemon the one hand and propagate the political game of complexity on the otherhand, or rather, system requirement.

12 / III :: cooperation & learning

Several new perspectives on cooperation are stimulatedand opened while implementing this new vehicle into the societal sphere ofdemocratic elections.

 

Lets first have a glimpse on those 4 voters … wherethe same colours represent equal votees. Blanks represent unique votees in thecontext considering only this group of 4.

A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

C

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

D

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A relates to voter B by Blue, to C by Green, to D byboth Red and Green;

C and D relate to one another by both Green andTurquoise.

While relations concretely expressed build on theattraction of “same family sense”, nowthe controversial differences may inspire to overcome in conversationschallenging ones formulation potentials and sphere for global unity strife.

 

Another cooperational level is emerging … that is thelevel of generational awareness.

Let us see for some situations that needconsideration:

F1

 

 

 

 

 

F7

 

 

 

 

 

F13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A1

 

 

 

 

 

A7

 

 

 

 

 

A13

How do a 18 year old human and a parent of 53 relatein the political decision core?

The 18 year human is in the 4th year ofdealing with 20 points to assign the personal contribution in the collectivesphere. Related to the parent s/he realises the fact of life that once s/hewill be in the situation of the other, by then dissolving from the higherelectional budgets. The parent is theoretically in the E8 box where a 80 pointsbudget on the election circuit is in the pocket to attach to Votees. The formerduty pressure to vote however, can now be dissolved if this voter has managedto reach the transformational conscious-level that meets the ultimate ideal ofthe Votee: no budget, however the awareness to put the deeds to the mouth inthe collective sphere is learned (sufficient).

 

Another situation that occurs later in the samerelationship:

F1

 

 

 

 

 

F7

 

 

 

 

 

F13

 

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*

 

 

A1

 

 

 

 

 

A7

 

 

 

 

 

A13

How do a 40 year old human and a parent of 75 relatein the political decision core?

Can the reader manage to give an explanation thatmeans a thing on the communion side?

 

In this short but illustrated design narration spacefor further analysis on relational consequences when this design is implementedin the actual world of democracy as a decisional vehicle agreed upon is notfilled, but deliberately kept open for communities that are willing to commentand have dialogue on their intercourse processes.

 

13 / IV :: presence & dynamics

Let me adda weekly notion lectured by mr. Andrew Cohen :

Our Future Potential - Andrew Cohen - 2006 week 51

The intersubjective structures thatwill hold our future potential don't pre-exist out there in the ether; they arecreated by real people. And I feel like a big part of my work has to do withfinding out what it actually means to create those structures, consciously,together. I don't know where this is all ultimately leading, butI do know for sure that the stability of the new structures is completelydependent upon the actual level of integrity and authenticity of theindividuals who are creating them.

Considering this quote in relation with the contexttalked about in the context and its referential design of a peoples massdecision tool we may say the Generation Binding Silence structure is also ofthe type “intersubjective” while the vehicle guides people, generations,individuals through the mental time sphere of life. Accepting this analyticalstate we also have to consider the educational factor of facilitating bothinter-human and inter-institutional communication in the two relationalradicals of Interior / Exterior and Individual / Collective sphere given asquadrants in the context as a whole. Here all the decisional conversationquadrants governance, dialogue, politics and democracy are addressed.

 

The presence of all the essential co-operationalperspectives is acknowledged and kept in a dynamical rhythm. Each day membersof society shift from one generation step to another, not each year but eachindividual once every 7 years on a birthday. Some of those individuals raise onthe budget line and other ones dissolve, or by following the system-wisebreakdown or by accepting a fact of life and partaking citizen educations.

00 /V :: Concluding Article “Shift in Voting :: Democracy Catalyst”

 

Since 1990 a new way of managing,maintaining and sustaining democratic representation core in line with thepeoples preference is mediated by a dutch reformer. Regarding theconventional way of voting, known as Oneman One vote in combination with a vast confidence in statistical proof of mass events, this newway of voting relies on parameters thatare all at stake in the collective sphere. The originator named this new way of voting, that very likely canbe an answer to the Einstein Quest “another way of thinking”, in 2000“generation binding” and since recent “generation binding s’ilence”, referencing both matrix and spiral mechanisms included in this “mass mind model”.

 

Building this article with the originator in order toreveal the mechanism to the people, let us pass the questions:

·       Why do we need this?

·       What thought emerged this?

·       Where do we, the people, gainfrom it?

·       How do we implement it,

·       or before that, how do weconvince one another on the pivotal esteem?

·       Can you tell us about somerefinements?

 

Whydo we, people of a nation, need this?

 

I spectate this world and the competition at vast scales beyond the human personal mind thatpulses into all our lives, in all our nations = nations that I see as clustersof individuals living in a sort of controlled area, intentionallyself-managing, maintaining, sustaining the standards of their people. Now, inthose years we seem to be in a kind of harness that doesnot resonate the human creative friction we somehowsuppose as general human fundaments. Letme share a comment of Jan Roelofs, a partner working in my learningspaceiGovernance & iPolitics (i=integral). He quoted an article about religaregroups recognized in an investigation in the Netherlands 2006 – just before thenovember 2006 elections. The largest group is 26 percent of people,individuals, who quest their own individual spirituality … So this group is notrepresented by any political party. I can be an option to think that those people do not affirm the system welive in anymore! Do you reader read me,here right now? Okay, I know I am drawing a quick however very strong line ifyou see it from the side of a booming trendline.

Do the notions of mr. Ken Wilber in Boomeritis synchronize with those trends?

Is there the thought that he is in favour withthe city of Amsterdam, inshort A’dam (were you aware of that signal of connection)?

And to be clear from my personal engagement isn’t thatright in the middle of the Rose where I live with my public company Waternet , where the elitepositions the company as a water-cycle service company serving waste,surface and drinking water and I proposeto them to make it an integrated water-cycle service company where the humanfactor is fully implemented in the focus of the wisdom board?

Whatthought emerged this?

Let me first draft the circumstance that sort of struck my life in the time that an ideaentered my visional mind. By occasion I was employed with BSO/Origin, a former dutch information and softwarecompany, and just a year after visiting Frances Bicentennial in 1989, I was askedto co-member my political party in thelocal council. So, what am I saying here … my open mind was in a sort ofcreative friction with History, Democracy and Technology.

So, what thought emerged the awareness of Shift inVoting :: Democracy Catalyst?

I was living in 3 worlds, and in the same periodI experienced all kind of communicationchaos with my fellow humans :: sort of loosing my communication (fibres)…

I investigated this all the time relying on my strongbeliefs … I even noted down a list of 12 persons that “deserved” my full trust… and every now and then I replaced one by another one = think, confirming myself-development.

So I was all the time practising a new kind of“voting”, which is in my strong belief a core for decision making for all humans partaking the “world order”, thespaceship “earth”.

 

Simple start for the vision was the thought : caneveryone get 20 points to assign to a selection of at least 3 individuals thatgain by my decision my trust to be in a fruitfull team on political interests.My selection, and the ability to change that selection at any time, should setmy focus on the playgrounds of local politics and exercise my brainframeon global affairs.

 

An illustrationdocument on (collective) decisionmaking qoutated:

Can two decisionsthat contradict each other both be good.?

Surprising as it may seem the answer is- Yes.

The reason is simple: different patients have different priorities; some prefer life with

disability to death, while others prefer death to life with disability. Both decisions are

Good for those who made them, as theyare determined by different priorities, not by facts,

knowledge or logic. Different people have different priorities, and there is no absolute

priority enabling us to grade allpriorities.

How does all this relate topolitics?

Is politics about decisions or aboutconclusions?

Do politicians decide policy or concludepolicy?

In politics people vote. Voting is choosing. To choose is to prefer. People decide what to

prefer. Anyone deciding policy - King, Dictator, President, Prime Minister, Leader, or

ordinary citizen - chooses one option from a number ofoptions. We cannot choose a

conclusion. Answering What to do? is always a decision, never a conclusion.

Decisions are determined by priorities,not by data, knowledge or reasoning. The same facts,

knowledge, and logic, can lead todifferent decisions due to different priorities.

Politics is decisions, notconclusions. We decide political issues. We do not conclude them.

Those who make a decision are responsible for its results as they could make a different

decision (motivated by a differentpriority) and get different results.

Politicians whose decisions produce undesirable results usually try to evade their

responsibility for such results bysaying I had no choice pretending theirdecisions were

conclusions. But they voted. Voting is choosing. One cannot choose a conclusion.

 

So, the individual conclusion

“ICH HABE ES NICHT GEWUSST”

may be a notice of lack : lack of an appropriatemethodology (system),

and thereby systematically promotingpublic ignorance.

Wheredo we, the people, gain from this new kind of thinking?

Honestly, I could not say that or proof the gain for along time …

Since december 2000 there a pivot happened: themagazine Ode organized an event where the Treaty of Bretton Woods waschallenged to “our time”.

At that event an open space conference breeded theterm “generation binding”. The term S’ilence is recently attached to those 2words, replacing the modern science term Matrix.

 

Let meshare another Wilberian Type Quadrant private investigation:

 

human sense fields (by cosmic resonance)

See

Feel

Think

Touch

analogue to the basic perspectives :

I

It

We

Its

analogue to the public functionalities :

Behaviour

Physical

Cultural

Societal

 

I do not say this is the truth, but it is a way ofseeing & sensing a truth …

I sense this can be a perception on general truth …

 

The 5th Verb that reverberates is the verb:: force

“Heal” :: lightning

… which resonates on …

“Speak” :: sounding

 

this verb is like the thumb orchestring the 4 fingers(the Quadrant) …

they are all true and whole partakers in a field ofcooperation.

Now, back to the question … I see and cannotthink alone …

So, cooperating we, the people, accept our thinking asthe new kind of human rising NOW.

And the philosophic notice may be

we got beyond

Descartes “I think, so : I am”

 

;-) :: ( Heal :: See – Feel – Touch –Think :: Speak )

 

(can you please think about this while seeing your world through our eyes?)

 

Howdo we implement it, or before that, how do we convince one another on thepivotal esteem?

Convince?

I donot sense the effect of convincing,

I’ld rather stick to the word mr. Peter Merry (centerfor human emergence – the netherlands) sort of“invented” recently:

 

SYNNERVATE(just g**gle it).

 

Then, how do we implement it :: have an internationaldebate on this subject calling all stations to subscribe a globaljoint venture project and facilitatethe PEOPLES DIALOGUE . In the meantime we get on building the tools justaccepting the rough draftlines as they are and bring it up. Not only as aparadigm for election procedures at nation or local community scale but also onschools and universities and big companies.

 

do you get the picture, pivoting all objections to theprojects advantage?

Can you tell us about some refinements?

Okay, I will tell some:

9.     ata generation phase (consider life generally split up in 13x7 yearzones) eachhuman has a budget for voting on the national and the local scale, and to thatprovisionally on the global scale.

10.Eachphase specific budget sticks to the rules that a maximum of 50 percent of thebudget may be assigned to the personal favourite votee (term replaces the wordpublic representative or candidate on political issues). Meaning, everyone getsused to bring up a team that cooperates in the common field of dialogue ; saydebate when the decisions are mutually made.

11.Avoter cannot be a Votee, and vice versa …

12.Thegeneration approach defines the act of the Votee to be recommendable for allhumans, may I say here the working class. So the kind of work the Votee does,i.e. loosing his job and being available a a public servant, is the idealsituation for all people. Reality says that only 5 percent of the people assigntheir talents on that exposure.

13.Thissystem is built upon the requirement that the system works (why not?). So, atthe end of a lifetime each Voter has the same budget on Voting as the Votee =which is defined as ZERO POINTS (you vote by acting mutual).

14.Therefinement conclusion is, if I may say this, an act in the line of Praise ofFolly, a short story on life by Desiderius Erasmus, it is about Dying, aboutbeing in the Fire. So, to all those Votees we, the people say, you are mydestiny in the sense of being in the Fire without False Measure (=Voting &Learning to Manage).

15.Whileevery Voter can maintain the personal budget on the fly of life, it may be ofour notice that s/he is less drifting on mediation just before an election Day.So, is this an advantage or is this a disadvantage regarding the seriousness ofthe communities truth and authenticity? (let my 7th refinement be a quest, okay!)

16.Lastrefinement here, can be the quest on worldcitizen forum where one isinvestigating a global democracy and an instrument that guides all involved ina profound dynamic flow including synchronisation points as decisions are. Letme drop two options in this broadcasting article:

a.      thisGBS’ilence paradigm describing an alternative for national and local electionsreplacing the old one, one man one vote, can be a fundament for the Global CoreElection by splitting the budget in 2 parts: at most 50 percent of the budgetmay be attached to fellow country votees; and there is no restriction to thepercentage given to outer country votees.

b.     anotherapproach given the GBS’ilence fundament can be the collective GBS’vote. Adefinition of a collective GBS’vote can be that the collective is a group of 5(transnational) individuals that interacts willingly for at least 1 year in asort of harmonic. Only group budgets can account in the Global Election Core.Any worldcitizen is free to arrange a group that can be authentified. ( a roughand fresh idea :)

Isthis now at the start of year 2007 the right time to shift from the old to thenew method?

To me, this is the right time ; and really I did noteven wait for this moment to come …

I live this (hell of a) life … may I invite you to breathit in and out again and again?

 



[1] We slicethrough the design more easily with the catalyzing construction delivered byKen Wilbers 4 Quadrants, to be learned in depth at Integral Institute and hiswork. Those 4 Quadrants deliver 4 perspectives out of the radical lines interior/exteriorand individual/collective crossing one another delivering the 4 quadrantscommunicational together in a contextual sphere at stage. In order to remindourselves being connected in this articlesphere it is recommendable torecognize the “ :: “ , 4 dotQuadrants as a guiding symbol to a universal integral language grammar.