Somebody has a fundamental ignorance of Rule of Law.
The Constitution already authorizes the People to exercise Constitutional Law and administer the Government in the event of government failure to act or perform the duties by which they are obliged by Constitutional Law.
For the record. More government is never the solution to bad government.
This is about building a tool so the people can actually do what you claim we are allowed to do. Well if we are allowed to do it then why aren’t we? Because we don’t have the systems to do so. We need a whole new thing , but if you took the time to read (even the whole title) you would see it isn’t part of government at all. It is decentralized.
If you are serious we can use as many minds here as possible. We also strongly suggest understanding what collective swarm intelligence is. It is easy to criticize at first, but becomes much harder once you understand it, test it and use it. It’s as real as jiu jitsu in a fight. And we are in a fight.
For the record we agree with what you are saying. We are for no rulers. But agreed upon rules. What we have is a lack of accountability. America was decentralized for the time. But it has been gamed now. It needs a new tool to help it. If you are a systems developer please dig into some of the links and see what kind of system you think could help us. Maybe start here so you can see that we are not really advocating for bigger government. We are fully occupied and we need a tool - a new system - to regain control. A tool like this one: https://open.substack.com/pub/joshketry/p/digital-shock-collars-for-politicians?r=7oa9d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
lol. The Constitution has become subverted because our entire system has been corrupted. There is zero accountability. It sounds like your head is in fantasy land.
Also read the article, this isn’t about more government. It is about the people actually holding the government accountable.
More government or some enforcement agency (25%, 4th branch) trying to reign in the other 75% that is totally corrupt. Who watches the watchers? And who watches them? Who appoints the watchers...the voter? How can we trust the people appointed to be the watchers? They may be able to hoodwink the public as well as any politician. In order for the watchers to have any power, they must be able to put people in prison or kill them off.
Say your 4th branch of independents finds corruption, then what? Are you going to replace some people with better non-corrupt ones? How long before they become corrupt too?
Unless you pull out all the roots of corruption and burn the seeds of corruption, you will fail. Realistically, I do not see how that is accomplished under the system called "government".
You see, the common denominator is government (in any form you like) that is utterly corruptible because even with watchers, they too can also be bribed and corrupted. Corruption pays monstrous "extra" dividends whereas living under the laws does not. Without ultra serious consequences for acting with corruption, nothing changes.
If the reform movement you’re advocating for only has 4% or so of the population, then it can be no better than the much-maligned 1%. We the people really has to be an overwhelming majority to be truly effective. I think you’re right about the fact that most of us could agree on many things, but any time we pass our agency over to a small group of people, you risk gaming and corruption. I would leave out that bit about only needing a small fraction of the population to affect change, even though it’s true. The problem is that it’s easy to convince the rest of us that what this small group is doing is against our interests. We’re easily manipulated in that way.
The “government” as set up in the US is composed of three different entities — the executive (which is called the government in many countries), the legislature and the judiciary. They interact and some of their members are elected, some appointed, and some hired. One could argue that there is another entity — private enterprise— that is usually hired, but in many cases just advisory, that wields real power. This entity includes media companies. Any solution to corruption in government needs to address all these entities.
People don’t seem to have gotten the gist of your title — that we need more extra-governmental organizations to make the actual government function in our interest. These have traditionally been called the 4th branch of government, and examples are the independent press, nonprofit organizations focused on various issues, and civic organizations.
This is certainly an engaging intellectual exercise. One ointment covered fly is that half of our swarm consists of ^$$?@!#s who bring us down every time. If we could speak ant we'd probably hear them make the same complaint.
Thank you for the communication. This correspondent is pleased to learn of any serious intellectual effort to improve the human species' circumstances, particularly those that come near to my nest, and your writings will be read with understanding. Does your policy of exclusion come with a baseball cap or perhaps a coffee mug with an insignia?
I have always been of the opinion that "Simple" works better than adding another layer of dust and confusion to any process. Dust- assumed legitimacy with good intentions - inevitably obscures a clear focus on any issue(s) that may be faltering from its intended purpose.
The three branches of government in the United States which are clearly defined, the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branch, work very well together when they are not shrouded in fog, covered with an accumulation of misleading innuendos - or assisted by corrupt influences (the Deep State with the political assistance of legacy media) like what we have witnessed during the last administration. A corrupted Justice department was allowed to run wild due to unfounded, misleading and never proven political accusations. Could another layer be corrupted and mislead the American nation by means of altered "swarm" results? Show me how and I might be convinced.
This may sound like an argument for a "Fourth Layer" but, again, SIMPLE is best. Keep the three and keep them in clear focus and function as to what was intended for our form of government. I can almost predict that a fourth layer of government, as well intended as it might be, will only add to the intended mission of our government. It might be easier and more reliable to work with what we know and avoid any possible opportunity for misleading the public.
You realize we aren’t really talking about a branch of government right? It is simple. Those three branches are fully corrupted. We need a new system that we the people control and build together.
This is very similar to complaints I’ve heard about the sortition and citizen assembly idea I love. The answer put forth by those in that movement is similar to what you have said — establish parallel systems that inherently have less chance of being corrupted, and allow them to operate on a non-threatening scale at first, and build from there.
I have to ask, why do we need a government if we have decentralized ballot measures? If there is direct democracy, why would we risk repeating the corruption of centralized government by continuing to have politicians that we expend resources on keeping in line?
This is one of the most thorough outlines I’ve seen for what a decentralized, people-powered alternative could look like. The detail you’ve gone into gives it real weight. There’s a lot I agree with, and I think you're pointing in the right direction.
That said, I want to gently offer a layer to this that might sharpen the strategy over time.
You describe corruption as the root of the problem, but I’d suggest it’s actually a symptom. Corruption thrives in systems where coordination is opaque, concentrated, and insulated from consequence. The real leverage point isn’t just rooting out “corrupt actors”, it’s redesigning how power moves. When coordination is transparent, reflexive, and distributed in ways that can’t easily be hijacked, corruption becomes harder to sustain. It’s not that we ignore corruption, but we aim upstream. Your proposals all are already doing this.
That’s why I think your ideas about swarm intelligence, local trust circles, and decentralized investigative structures are so important. They point toward something I’d call Power Through, the kind of emergent, collective intelligence that doesn’t rely on top-down control. But to really harness that, we need systems that don’t just gather information or expose wrongdoing. They need to help people align action across difference, manage friction without splintering, and stay adaptive as things evolve.
Maybe it’s worth experimenting with some smaller-scale versions of this, local pilots where coordination patterns can be tested and refined. That could surface insights about where the real bottlenecks are, and how to build resilience into the system from the beginning.
Anyway, I’m glad you’re thinking this big. Let’s keep exploring how we build power that doesn’t just fight corruption, but renders it obsolete.
This is very interesting. Even though we got off to a weird start this is great. The person you are talking to is me, Josh Ketry from Buffalo NY. We do have a group here and we also have several writers , but I do most of the social media discussions. Just to offer a layer of vulnerability and trust here so you know who you are speaking to. Thanks for these interesting thoughts.
Somebody has a fundamental ignorance of Rule of Law.
The Constitution already authorizes the People to exercise Constitutional Law and administer the Government in the event of government failure to act or perform the duties by which they are obliged by Constitutional Law.
For the record. More government is never the solution to bad government.
No government is good government.
This is about building a tool so the people can actually do what you claim we are allowed to do. Well if we are allowed to do it then why aren’t we? Because we don’t have the systems to do so. We need a whole new thing , but if you took the time to read (even the whole title) you would see it isn’t part of government at all. It is decentralized.
That's excellent! Yes, we just need to create the infrastructure! How can I get involved? I'm a retired Systems Engineer.
If you are serious we can use as many minds here as possible. We also strongly suggest understanding what collective swarm intelligence is. It is easy to criticize at first, but becomes much harder once you understand it, test it and use it. It’s as real as jiu jitsu in a fight. And we are in a fight.
https://youtu.be/YyXEzWtii_A?si=lYaPuFunMOms6WvV
For the record we agree with what you are saying. We are for no rulers. But agreed upon rules. What we have is a lack of accountability. America was decentralized for the time. But it has been gamed now. It needs a new tool to help it. If you are a systems developer please dig into some of the links and see what kind of system you think could help us. Maybe start here so you can see that we are not really advocating for bigger government. We are fully occupied and we need a tool - a new system - to regain control. A tool like this one: https://open.substack.com/pub/joshketry/p/digital-shock-collars-for-politicians?r=7oa9d&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=false
lol. The Constitution has become subverted because our entire system has been corrupted. There is zero accountability. It sounds like your head is in fantasy land.
Also read the article, this isn’t about more government. It is about the people actually holding the government accountable.
More government or some enforcement agency (25%, 4th branch) trying to reign in the other 75% that is totally corrupt. Who watches the watchers? And who watches them? Who appoints the watchers...the voter? How can we trust the people appointed to be the watchers? They may be able to hoodwink the public as well as any politician. In order for the watchers to have any power, they must be able to put people in prison or kill them off.
Say your 4th branch of independents finds corruption, then what? Are you going to replace some people with better non-corrupt ones? How long before they become corrupt too?
Unless you pull out all the roots of corruption and burn the seeds of corruption, you will fail. Realistically, I do not see how that is accomplished under the system called "government".
You see, the common denominator is government (in any form you like) that is utterly corruptible because even with watchers, they too can also be bribed and corrupted. Corruption pays monstrous "extra" dividends whereas living under the laws does not. Without ultra serious consequences for acting with corruption, nothing changes.
If the reform movement you’re advocating for only has 4% or so of the population, then it can be no better than the much-maligned 1%. We the people really has to be an overwhelming majority to be truly effective. I think you’re right about the fact that most of us could agree on many things, but any time we pass our agency over to a small group of people, you risk gaming and corruption. I would leave out that bit about only needing a small fraction of the population to affect change, even though it’s true. The problem is that it’s easy to convince the rest of us that what this small group is doing is against our interests. We’re easily manipulated in that way.
The “government” as set up in the US is composed of three different entities — the executive (which is called the government in many countries), the legislature and the judiciary. They interact and some of their members are elected, some appointed, and some hired. One could argue that there is another entity — private enterprise— that is usually hired, but in many cases just advisory, that wields real power. This entity includes media companies. Any solution to corruption in government needs to address all these entities.
People don’t seem to have gotten the gist of your title — that we need more extra-governmental organizations to make the actual government function in our interest. These have traditionally been called the 4th branch of government, and examples are the independent press, nonprofit organizations focused on various issues, and civic organizations.
This is certainly an engaging intellectual exercise. One ointment covered fly is that half of our swarm consists of ^$$?@!#s who bring us down every time. If we could speak ant we'd probably hear them make the same complaint.
We need to have a code. Not everyone is welcome to our swarm. And there are very good benefits of being part of our swarm.
Thank you for the communication. This correspondent is pleased to learn of any serious intellectual effort to improve the human species' circumstances, particularly those that come near to my nest, and your writings will be read with understanding. Does your policy of exclusion come with a baseball cap or perhaps a coffee mug with an insignia?
I have always been of the opinion that "Simple" works better than adding another layer of dust and confusion to any process. Dust- assumed legitimacy with good intentions - inevitably obscures a clear focus on any issue(s) that may be faltering from its intended purpose.
The three branches of government in the United States which are clearly defined, the Legislative, Judicial and Executive Branch, work very well together when they are not shrouded in fog, covered with an accumulation of misleading innuendos - or assisted by corrupt influences (the Deep State with the political assistance of legacy media) like what we have witnessed during the last administration. A corrupted Justice department was allowed to run wild due to unfounded, misleading and never proven political accusations. Could another layer be corrupted and mislead the American nation by means of altered "swarm" results? Show me how and I might be convinced.
This may sound like an argument for a "Fourth Layer" but, again, SIMPLE is best. Keep the three and keep them in clear focus and function as to what was intended for our form of government. I can almost predict that a fourth layer of government, as well intended as it might be, will only add to the intended mission of our government. It might be easier and more reliable to work with what we know and avoid any possible opportunity for misleading the public.
You realize we aren’t really talking about a branch of government right? It is simple. Those three branches are fully corrupted. We need a new system that we the people control and build together.
This is very similar to complaints I’ve heard about the sortition and citizen assembly idea I love. The answer put forth by those in that movement is similar to what you have said — establish parallel systems that inherently have less chance of being corrupted, and allow them to operate on a non-threatening scale at first, and build from there.
https://youtu.be/xHH5b4-_Icw?si=4W67pCz-U0LoiHvG
I have to ask, why do we need a government if we have decentralized ballot measures? If there is direct democracy, why would we risk repeating the corruption of centralized government by continuing to have politicians that we expend resources on keeping in line?
We cannot get to there from here without steps.
This is one of the most thorough outlines I’ve seen for what a decentralized, people-powered alternative could look like. The detail you’ve gone into gives it real weight. There’s a lot I agree with, and I think you're pointing in the right direction.
That said, I want to gently offer a layer to this that might sharpen the strategy over time.
You describe corruption as the root of the problem, but I’d suggest it’s actually a symptom. Corruption thrives in systems where coordination is opaque, concentrated, and insulated from consequence. The real leverage point isn’t just rooting out “corrupt actors”, it’s redesigning how power moves. When coordination is transparent, reflexive, and distributed in ways that can’t easily be hijacked, corruption becomes harder to sustain. It’s not that we ignore corruption, but we aim upstream. Your proposals all are already doing this.
That’s why I think your ideas about swarm intelligence, local trust circles, and decentralized investigative structures are so important. They point toward something I’d call Power Through, the kind of emergent, collective intelligence that doesn’t rely on top-down control. But to really harness that, we need systems that don’t just gather information or expose wrongdoing. They need to help people align action across difference, manage friction without splintering, and stay adaptive as things evolve.
Maybe it’s worth experimenting with some smaller-scale versions of this, local pilots where coordination patterns can be tested and refined. That could surface insights about where the real bottlenecks are, and how to build resilience into the system from the beginning.
Anyway, I’m glad you’re thinking this big. Let’s keep exploring how we build power that doesn’t just fight corruption, but renders it obsolete.
This is very interesting. Even though we got off to a weird start this is great. The person you are talking to is me, Josh Ketry from Buffalo NY. We do have a group here and we also have several writers , but I do most of the social media discussions. Just to offer a layer of vulnerability and trust here so you know who you are speaking to. Thanks for these interesting thoughts.
Gonna mull it over