A New Decentralized Way To Run Government
How can representatives be representing the people if the people have no clear and organized way to voice their opinions? Collective intelligence systems solve for this.
Before we begin, let’s establish a few things:
1) A Collective “Swarm” Intelligence System is a digital system that allows large groups of people to think and make decisions as one person. Imagine asking 1 million people an open-ended question (not multiple choice) and getting one creative and interesting answer from the crowd (also called a “swarm”). It is a way for millions or even billions of people to have a voice together. If you are not familiar with these types of systems start with this concept video HERE to give you an idea of what we mean. Or Read THIS, THIS, or THIS.
2) Any collective intelligence system we would use for governance would need to be high-trust, or trustless, so that it keeps AI, bots, and corruption out, like we wrote about HERE.
Assuming these two things are understood, now let’s imagine a new decentralized way to run government.
In order to decentralize government — or any system — the person in charge of the system simply needs to make their position transparent and then decentralize their own position, like we wrote about HERE, and turn it over to the constituents or members of the system.
For government, that could mean the existing politician. Or, it could mean a new candidate - say someone highly trusted from the existing community that gets nominated by the people to run for office based mostly on their level of trustworthiness.
That’s it.
Imagine a politician making their system 100% transparent, then turning over their position to their constituents - or at the very least solving all problems actually with their constituents by listening to them. To insure transparency, politicians could wear cameras, post all bills and votes online for review, and write new laws directly with the people. Imagine turning politics into a reality-like TV show, broadcast to the world in real time, where the people had a say in the outcome.
The weak link where corruption always happens in our systems is the politician. So that is the part we need to fix and make high-trust (or trustless) with better systems. We need a system that monitors and holds accountable the politicians, like a digital shock collar. And the best way to do that is the give the people a direct voice in the process. And with digital collective “swarm” intelligence systems, that is entirely possible.
Listen to a potential candidate described how they would turn their government position into a decentralized swarm like this:
“First, to be clear, I really wouldn’t want to do this. But I would be willing to do it if they nominated me. So I thought about it, and after discussing it with my family, yes, I would. But the level of transparency I would be willing to show to the people would really be a burden on my home life and my family. Heck, I would wear cameras 24/7 if that’s what it took to earn the trust of the people once again. They would know exactly what their representative was doing at all times for my entire time in office. After considering all this and how radical transparency in my position would be very challenging, I would do it anyway. I would look at it like a service, just like serving in the military. The systems need our help, so it would, in its own way, have that purpose to me—or duty or whatever. And that makes the decision easier for me.
As for getting elected… It could be any office, doesn’t matter… Democrat or Republican. Whatever was easiest. Just get me in. I would run under one simple campaign: to fix the corruption in our systems by making my position transparent while working directly with the people (via swarming) to fix the actual systems. We would then set aside all hot-button topics until we first fixed the corruption problem in our government—or at least the office I was elected to, to start. Pick any office. It also doesn’t matter—school board, mayor, Congress, President. Once I was in office, I’d show what real representation looks like. I’d turn around and decentralize my position to the swarm and make my entire office transparent. The entire swarm would see everything I did—unless, of course, it was classified, and even then, I would be fighting to declassify as much as possible to maintain trust and transparency in the system. Anything that stayed classified would, at the very least, have a citizen-appointed independent committee to review it. Also, there would be no private meetings with me. I would wear cameras and mics everywhere I went, broadcasting live on the internet. The people should see the whole process, where the problems exist, and help come up with possible solutions on how to fix the flaws in our systems. I would post all my meetings online, take feedback from the people on all major decisions, and vote on and write new bills directly with the constituents instead of with the corporations like how the bills are written now. Any question I was asked by media I’d only answer from us all, as “we”—as in “We The People.” That’s who I would be answering for. My personal opinions wouldn’t matter. So I would turn around and ask the constituents what our position was on whatever question I was asked, and that would be our answer.
And then, most importantly, we would go find the corruption together. The people would tell me what rock to turn over or where to shine my spotlight, and I would. And together is how we would fix each problem we encountered. In fact, my position in office would become pointless. I would basically be a robot for the swarm—at least until we got rid of the corruption and improved our systems. I would do whatever they said to, including using tax dollars to help them build better technology and infrastructure to make our systems better and even more trustworthy and less corruptible. Also, we would build new task forces and departments together to punish corruption. We could start a war on corruption of sorts. The people corrupting our systems wouldn’t like this, and they would for sure try to come for me. But if I got taken out by bad media, or being canceled, or smeared, or worse… I wouldn’t be afraid. Someone else would just pick up the flag and take my place. Plus, these types of systems could spread so easily they would be hard to stop. And once the people saw how well it worked, they would want the same for their governments too. It would no longer be about the person in office. Representation would once again be about the people. They would have an actual voice of authority again. All corruption would be obvious based on transparency alone.
Think about it. The people who are doing the corrupting fear this the most. The idea of people unifying with a big spotlight in a position of power is a huge problem for anyone trying to corrupt our systems. If 3 million people could suddenly see what was really going on behind closed doors and come up with ways to problem-solve that together, things would change. And fast. This is why the people doing the corrupting work so hard to divide us and so hard to keep all systems centralized so that they can just control the top of the system with gatekeepers loyal to the corruption.
Once in office, I would also be vocal about pressuring other people in office all around me to do exactly what I did. I would say some of the terminology that they often like to say, such as, ‘If you aren’t with us, you are against us! Why won’t you swarm with the people? Are you afraid to see that your actions don’t align with the wishes of your constituents? Are you afraid to make your position transparent? If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear!’
The people, at the very least, should know their own opinions. How can representatives be representing the people if the people have no clear and organized way to voice their opinions? This way we could hear the voice of the people and match them with the actions of their representatives to seeing how far off they really are—giving these politicians tastes of their own Social Credit Scores.
In the end, the goal would be to do to government what Napster did to the music industry, or what podcasts and Substack and social media did to corporate media conglomerates: get rid of the centralized corrupt gatekeepers and return the power back to the people. Maybe we wouldn’t keep that system like that forever, but the people could pretty easily take direct control back following this simple process until we fixed the corruption and then decide what next steps are needed to take from there. All we need is the right digital high-trust platforms to help us.”
We like to argue this:
If technology we have today would have existed when the Constitution was written, do you think it would have been used to help the people govern? Of course it would have. The people who are corrupting our systems today are using technology to harm us. They use technology to spy, to control, to corrupt, and to keep us divided. We as citizens need to be wise enough to also use it to prevent that corruption. The fear of technology is hampering us. We can either choose to do nothing and fear it, or we can choose to embrace it and use it to make better systems for society - ones that hold representatives accountable, and even give them social credit scores like they want to do to us, like we wrote about HERE.
Thanks for reading!
All problems that do not defy the laws of physics are solvable.
Humans solve problems better in high-trust groups.
And Solving problems is happiness!
#CollectiveIntelligence
Please join our think tank message board at SwarmAcademy.ai where we continue conversations like this one and where you will be able to participate in swarm intelligence problem solving with us on a SWARM FORCE platform once it is finished being built.
For over 3 billion years on this planet there were only single-celled organisms. Then one day they somehow learned to work together and make complex multi-celled creatures . Right now we are like those single-celled organisms. Our next evolution is finding how to work together, better… (like we wrote about here).
#SwarmAcademy #NetworkState #LEADERLESS #ResultsMatterMost #DecentralizeEverything #DemandTransparency
COMMENTS ARE FOR EVERYONE AS A PLACE TO THINK-TANK SOLUTIONS. They will never be for paid-only subscribers and we will never charge a subscription.
So, to understand this:
You would hope that citizens develop an obsessive scrutiny over some family's life, every moment of the day, so that they completely understand the nuances of what their 'representative' said, to whom, why and what he meant, as well as what he did, and why didn't he do it differently. Then you would have people fight online over their opinions of what they saw, and split into 'believers' and 'non-believers' on social media.
That is your way of 'decentralizing governing' for optimal results?
Is all that, because you so strongly believe that, no matter what, people could never crowdsource information, listen to whostleblowers as well as experts, express all possible understandings of the ISSUE, discuss and prioritize solutions, then vote and decide on those issues?
Is that because people cannot, and should never make any decisions, without 'representatives'?
You have people running businesses.
You have parents making life-and-death decisions for their children.
Would you take that away from them, because 'they can't', or 'shouldn't, and have them watch the stream of someone else's life, instead of gathering and processing information and listening to experts and then deciding?
The USA, from the 1840s until some point after WW2 was politically, economically, governmentally, and scientifically decentralized system with its analytical, deliberation, and decision making functions diffused with deliberate redundancy across a large and very dense network of semiautonomous nodes