Is Democracy the Problem?

Posted on July 30, 2025 by josuter

Is Democracy The Problem? jsuter@sbcglobal.net

Citizens blame leaders. Leaders blame citizens. Could it be that the problem is democracy itself? In an interview by Danny Haiphong with Sean Foo and Richard Wolff, they discuss the inability of US business and investors to know the investing landscape. If the current politics is unfavorable, investors only need to wait a few more years until another band of merry men and women take over. This does not bode well for future planning. China has a dictatorship but they still have 5-yr plans. Russia too is not held back by a three-legged stool of democracy and seems to move faster.

Are we seeing the end or an evolution of the Nation-State? A complex system must change several things simultaneously if it is to maintain balance. If only one thing is changed, the system will snap-back to what it was before, be it Deep State or whatever. It is important to look at all aspects of our existence within the Nation-State framework. This includes looking at the structure of government itself and analyzing what feedback mechanisms keep it on track.

One option is to put more authority in the hands of a single regional leader, but then also make that leader removable at any time by 80% of any minority. This would encourage communication in both directions and form a more Dynamic Democracy. Even Israel could use a Dynamic Democracy for the benefit of everyone.

A government which is set up only to divide the spoils will push leaders and citizens into separate spaces rather than have them work together to solve problems. Grassroot citizens – as a group – are often ahead of their leaders, especially in the knowledge of what is happening on the ground. Paraphrasing Friedrich Hayek: “there is often no substitute for information on the ground.”

Economics too must change if we are to address the health of the economy. An additional currency could be added at the hyper-local level with about 100 people. Properly used, hyper-local currencies (HLC) can be used to induce people to cooperate at the local level for the purpose of creating useful goods and services to trade on the open market. In addition, it creates resistance to inflation and a buffer against recession. Adding another currency at the hyperlocal level is where people can be accountable to each other without a court system.

Banks create incentives or gradients when they direct money from one sector to another. A business then uses that gradient power to create organization. There are other ways however, of creating organization that can be started by people at the local level. If ten bread winners are able to support two in their group for some period of time as determined by the group, then those two then can do any job that the group decides is important. They answer only to the group. This is an opportunity for grassroots engagement. In fact, many changes may not start without grassroots.

A new type of nation-state can join with other nation-states and maybe even business to form clusters that have defensive military capabilities. When the most powerful nation, where leaders dress in fine suits, cannot subdue one of the poorest nations where people dress like Star Wars characters, it may be time to think about different types of governing and military structures. An Association of Non-Nuclear Nations (AN3) does not need large, impressive buildings or fancy accoutrements, yet such an organization can create a purpose and flexibility that is missing from the United Nations. It is an exclusive club however, since nuclear nations cannot join.

Military industries too could find other missions, arming small clusters (3) of non-nuclear nations with non-nuclear missiles, maybe even some that are supersonic. Lots of money to be made here. It will be defensive buildup, yet able to reach critical targets within nuclear nations. This would remove the current advantage of nuclear weapons and point us toward a nuclear-free world.

If war and war games are the purview of the nation-state, then anti-war games may be the purview of citizens who must otherwise make the sacrifice for war mongers. What anti-war games look like is still unclear, but many things can be created by people at the grassroots with the goal of making the environment for a next-door neighbor or next-door country more predictable and stable. We cannot escape the fact that much of nature is about competition, so assertiveness and even aggression may be needed if a potentially dangerous or de-stabilizing threat is detected. The goal is to create a stable and predictable environment. Petitions to Congress may not be enough.

American citizens are told to “wake up!” – but sleep is not the correct metaphor. People have the wrong story in their heads due to mis- or missing information. Citizens can create additional information filters made up of small groups using any news source. They then bring ideas and information back to hash it out in a private space, maybe with team competition. This would benefit other readers and listeners of the news.

Another tactic is to focus on one target region or town (foreign or domestic) for a short period of time with the goal of giving people the tools to making their region self-sustaining. Others may benefit and learn from observation. This too can be done with competitive games. There are many places and many levels to start if there are people who see another pathway and share their vision. One person can also set a gradient, just like a bank, only smaller, by creating an incentive for an individual or small group to answer some specific question.

A transformed United States is more flexible and able to counteract the OBOR initiatives made by China in the developing world. Rather than regime change, we can contribute to the developing country becoming independent and healthy. That country will then be able to resist the OBOR initiatives – and we will gain trading partners.

Triple Play

Posted on January 12, 2025January 12, 2025 by josuter

Triple Play

by josuter

Social media and political podcasts have played an essential role in keeping the integrity of journalism alive. It is essential for change. In truth however, these podcasts are becoming a bit boring. Mearsheimer seems too predictable, and sure, it’s fun to be a part of J-Nap’s club with his half-million followers, but what are he and his followers doing to end the forever wars? It will take more than just getting angry or projecting ad hominem attacks.

Leaders don’t care what citizens think. We must make them care. We must make them listen and change course. The courts are too slow, and mainstream media is controlled by vested interests who hide the truth, only reporting what they find convenient. This creates a glass ceiling for useful information. We cannot reclaim democracy just at the ballot box. It is time to move to the next level. It is time for a Triple Play.

ONE- Temple University

The Question is “What is Anti-Semitism and what is Not?” The goal here is to put decision-making back in the hands of Temple students. Except for extreme cases, students should be able to judge what is anti-semitic and decide on a reasonable consequence. We as individuals and Small Groups (SG) from all over the country can focus on Temple for a few weeks, pushing ideas and information to them. This means up to and including public humiliation of those who abuse language or abuse their official position of power. Don’t know anyone who attends Temple? Maybe, but you probably know someone who knows someone else . . . we are all connected.

TWO – 2,3,4^th Tier Diplomats for Ukraine

The fact that our leaders are not talking with the Russians is frankly a sign of immaturity. Citizens can playact diplomacy as an alternative channel for communications and publish their results. We can cross borders with translators, using people of almost any age. Just nominate someone and support them. Create a Division of Labor for finding and filtering Ideas and Information. Efficiency and integrity are top priorities. This is not a social club.

THREE – Deconstruct Nuclear Weapons (NW)

Nuclear weapons treaties are good but temporary. In the long run treaties are not enough. An increasing number of nations want Nuclear Weapons. Therefore the chance of an accident goes up. Decisions about whether or not to launch thousands of NW must be made within minutes. A “launch” order will mean the end of human civilization. Survivors – if any – will be in survival mode. Deconstruction of NW at this point in time is the better option. NW can be replaced with Precision Kinetic Missiles (PKM) that are not nuclear, but they are precision and travel at supersonic speeds, from 5-10 times the speed of sound. At the time of this writing there is no way to stop them. i.e. There is no defense against PKM’s. All countries, both Nuclear and Non-Nuclear should be part of an offensive PKM group of 3 or more nations. PKMs can be triggered to work the same as a NW or set to trigger even faster. A system of 3 or more PKM’s can be aimed at the capital city of a nearby nuclear nation, arriving sooner than a conventional missile. This system is safer than any system of Nuclear Weapons. A nation targeted by several PKM’s may need to find new leadership, but the country will survive. This will remove reasons for the continued existence of NW.

It is unlikely that Nuclear nations will institute this system by themselves. Non-Nuclear nations, like responsible older siblings, must take the initiative to set up such a system.

The leadership in the West has been wrong about many things during these forever wars, including estimating the strength and resources of both our allies and our opponents. Inadequate information led to an incomplete mental models and poor understanding of the situation. We will be unable to respond to changing environments – political, social, or natural environments – without better information filters.

We must go beyond what our leaders can envision. Humiliation should only be a last resort for people who cannot listen and learn. We must look for more than someone to save us. We need to develop communication channels and processes to find practical solutions.

Each of the items listed in this Triple Play will require some Person-to-Person (P2P) communication. This can be difficult to get started. For many reasons, P2P may be the site of greatest resistance to change. It is the place of greatest fear, especially if one of the persons is holding a gun. It is also the place of greatest love and greatest sacrifice. Democracy is won or lost at this level. It is foundational.

We must push others to make decisions. Push them uphill. The Temple students must not only be allowed to take control of the Sem-Anti-Sem issue but pushed to take responsibility for making judgements and considering consequences. This is part of their education.

We must find places and ways to increase our ability to ask good questions and search for Useful Information. Play with the Question. Try a hypothetical situation. SGs may be the best place to start and try to figure out how to move useful information and ideas. SGs can be started with few friends who strategize, then maybe pass flyers with Questions or Ideas around the neighborhood community (even anonymously to start). i.e. “How do you (we) know anything about issue X?” Keep below radar until there is some momentum.

Big issues will require some planning and Division of labor for Information Gathering (DIG). Yet each smaller part can be started by a small, local group. We are not selling anything. We are challenging others to play ball.

States of Syria

Posted on December 15, 2024December 15, 2024 by josuter

The situation in Syria is portrayed as many radical Islamist groups who may start a civil war. This is not unlike the 109 parties to the Treaty of Westphalia that ended the Thirty-Years War in 1648. Those negotiations took place at two locations over 6 years. The warlords and princes who comprised the parties did not trust each other at all and so a complex arrangement was absolutely necessary if the fighting was to cease.

Today we have new tools of communication, such as the cell phone and other methods of communication. It is not unthinkable – if we can find some intermediaries – to start to bring these Islamist groups into some kind of stable balance. It may require division of Syria into “states” with each sect having their own piece of property or state. The engagement of a few open-minded religious leaders can help mold a new story.

In looking for a solution to the Gaza War, this could be a step to creating a better support system for all countries in the region.

David’s Slingshot

Posted on November 23, 2024November 23, 2024 by josuter

David’s Slingshot

by John Suter November 2024

David the shepherd boy must have practiced a lot with his slingshot. Maybe a friend showed him how to use it to fight off wolves. Maybe they had games to shoot targets. In any case, he was really good with the weapon. When he picked up a stone to fight Goliath, he knew he could take down the giant. Accuracy over brute strength here was a key lesson.

A similar situation exists in the proliferation of nuclear weapons today. The weapons themselves have only grown larger, large enough so that one megaton bomb can wipe out an entire city. Despite the fact that there have been at least two episodes since the Cuban Missile Crisis that came very close to triggering an all-out nuclear war, many nations believe they will be safer if they get the bomb. The confluence of these events should make us search for other solutions – starting now.

The change in the story is that the new supersonic missiles (SSM) are highly accurate. The new incoming Secretary of Defense notes that Russian supersonic missiles can take out all the US aircraft carriers in 20 minutes. This is a huge change. This is also an opportunity to re-think the need and usefulness for these Goliath nuclear bombs themselves. It must be an inducement to find and make real change in how we approach national security.

How do we change this situation? Decisions on the use of Nuclear Weapons (NW) are being made not only by Decision Makers (DM) near the top of the government and military, but by advisors who, because of their ignorance or hubris, believe that a nuclear war could be won and we (they) could survive. (The consequences of a nuclear war are spelled out clearly in several books, including “The Doomsday Machine” by Daniel Ellsberg who worked for the RAND corporation and the government). People at or near the top need better information and better feedback that they will not get from their colleagues.

The changeover to a nuclear weapon-free world will take some thought, but it seems obvious that the SSM will have to be put into place first, primarily in countries that are near nuclear powers. These can be both nuclear and non-nuclear, large and small countries. Then they must communicate with Decision Makers and the Family, Friends, and Colleagues (DM-FFC) of existing of Nuclear Powers using hand-delivered letters every few months, letting them know that if any nuclear weapons are detonated in an offensive or defensive manner, that the DM-FFC will be “taken out”. This requires cooperation and planning by small groups of state and/or non-state actors from three or more states near a nuclear state. Target DMs must be specific and must be frequently reminded, both privately and publicly, of the consequences of their decision. Ironically, this may provide cover for those DM’s who can now say “we have no choice”. Alliances between nations can lead to traps, as we learned from WWI, but alliances of small nations to create feedback loops are more likely to stabilize the system.

What will stop us from looking for such new security structures? Fear. This includes personal fear of looking weak or being different. The folk tale “The Emperor’s New Clothes” is a tale about the fear of appearing stupid to others. It reflects how leaders can be fooled by their advisors and continue to move forward, even when the truth is blurted out by a child. But why did the people around the Emperor not give better feedback? Fear and ignorance. We live as social beings in groups, not simply as individuals. We take cues for our behavior from those around us. This is both a strength and a weakness. It can create a fear that makes us want to become stupid – or at least appear so.

The question of allegiance has taken a step down since the advent of dual citizenship for many leaders and advisors at high levels. They can hardly demand that anyone else say a pledge of allegiance when they themselves cannot do it. This may, however, reflect an evolution of the role of the nation-state. It also raises questions of religion, philosophy and other functions of government. Is the purpose of humankind to forever fight one another? Or is this warring behavior a function of the discovery of new weapons in the Christmas stocking of leaders who have no vision but want to remain in the fraternity? Most of this can be rectified with better communication and better feedback to leaders and to each other. Robert McNamara’s “In Retrospect” was a search for the reasons for the misleading and misguided sources of advice and information that led us astray and into the war in Vietnam. He never really found a way to counteract this problem.

At any level there are many decisions that are not really explicit decisions at all. There is no specific logical reason or information that causes the decision. There is a fear of looking weak or different. Members behave according to what they think is expected of them, either from their common Story or from a “thought leader” who may be re-living their own fears. Soldiers act differently toward civilians when they are in pairs versus being alone.

We must create processes and structures to Find, Filter, and Move Useful Information (FFMUI). Leaders alone, even with their advisors, do not have time to do it. Such a processes can be created by decision makers at the top without giving up power, but with the possibility of gaining useful information. Such structures should enhance privacy of discussion, integrity of the information, and efficiency.

Another situation that may benefit from a better process of information gathering and filtering is the Ukraine War with the obvious need for a future European Security Structure. If current political leaders cannot imagine such a structure, there are others waiting in the wings to move forward. People who have been elected but not yet officials cannot presume to negotiate with other governments but there are other people without office who could still meet and exchange ideas now to get the process started. These meetings can start at any level with stories, seeds of ideas, and tools of communication. This cannot be ordered but could be suggested by the new incoming administration.

Evolution or End of the Nation-State?, Part C – Principles of Design for Change

Posted on July 5, 2024 by josuter

Evolution or End of the Nation-State? J. Suter

PART C – Principles of Design for Change

General Principles:

1. FB is Key

2. Structures influence the FUI

3. SG + Gradient create UI for FB

4. FComp creates Gradients + Increased Interaction

5. PUH + BTB

*DIG Tools (# 2,3,4))

(FB=Feedback, FUI=Flow of Useful Information, SG=Small Groups, UI=Useful Information, PUH=Push Uphill, DM=Decision Maker, BTB=Beyond the Border, DIG=Division for Information Gathering, TL=Target Learner)

General Principles

What are the General principles for moving the Nation-State to the next level? Providing Useful Information (UI) as feedback to Decision Makers (DM) is key. We know that structures of any kind can affect the flow of useful information, so using small groups as a division of labor can help find and filter useful information. Competition can create gradients or incentives, resulting in more interaction. Contrary to historical practices, we must push others uphill to create sustainable communities, both here and in other countries. It may be the only way out.

Can we see ahead enough to survive? How will we organize if there is no nation? What forces will provide a gradient if we give up the gun? (Don’t give it up!) Who will give us a clear vision and a goal? (We do!). If we want real change, the attitude that we can defeat other countries must be turned upside down. We do not want our opponents to feel insecure. We must push them uphill toward a sustainable existence, town by town, village by village.

Milton Friedman described change: “Only a crisis produces real change . . . and actions depend on the ideas lying around.” Yes, but that is change from the top when leaders feel the ground shifting. Long term change is more like the biological change that happens within our cells every day. That level of change is what creates and adult from two cells that just happen to meet during conception. That’s change!

How and Who? – Personal Stuff

Creating change can be very personal, so a few personal suggestions are in order: Do not be surprised that average citizen does not want to talk about important issues when they have no tools to talk. Who would listen to them anyhow? Look for creative applications, from small local issues up to the level of international affairs such as use of Dynamic Democracy for the Israel-Palestine Solution. (see “Israel-Palestine Solution” at < JoDa dot substack dot com >)

In creating public conversations, grassroots people mostly do not have 1. A task or goal, 2. Time to Talk, Listen, Think, Decide (TLTD) – at least not in public forums. 3. Small Groups (SG) with which to bounce off ideas and information. They must create these themselves because no one else will.

Resistance to this process may arise from any level. There may be more resistance at the grassroots until they understand the process. Try lighthearted issues to start. If resistance comes from leaders, then incorporate them into the process as players. Should feedback be anonymous? Think about it yourself or ask your SG.

Some issues may require Privacy and Deniability as part of the information and feedback process. Drop the cynics. Confront and challenge detractors. Postpone meeting with those who are angry and move on if there is no progress. This is not a social club.

Many will wonder, “Why should I push others up the hill? It’s not my town.” People with no direct skin in the game can be neutral observers yet create their own game with whatever goals they choose, just for fun or a challenge. With this attitude, they may be able to work around the existing resistance within some local hierarchy or work around resistance from BOG-power alone. This can benefit everyone. (see Examples and Possible Applications below)

Connect people to each other

We cannot force a Western-style democracy on every country in the world, but we can still push people in other countries to listen to each other. Find a specific individual in other country as a touch point and to start the process. “Is someone stealing from them?” With modern communication technology, this information can be found and passed on to other people of that country. Connect people to people.

One example in the developing world is the building sanitary plumbing for a community. This is an under-appreciated factor in the creation of a stable society since it helps to minimize disease-borne vectors. This is also something that local people can do themselves if they have tools of organization and communication.

1. Feedback is Key

Why were European leaders stunned from recent election results? They had different sources of information and were surrounded by advisors, each of whom had their own agenda. i.e. They obviously did not have good feedback during their time in office and used only information sources that reinforced their position.

As noted before, Feedback (FB) is good, useful information at the right place and right time. Those who do not recognize the value of FB mechanisms are under the spell of the BOG-only force behind the social hierarchy. For public policy or legislation, FB can be given from people on the outside and after a policy in place. If leaders do not listen, then grow the number of SG’s and repeat. Remember too that SG to provide FB can be comprised of a mix of people across national boundaries.

2. Structures influence Flow of Useful Information

Physical structures, social structures, real or metaphorical structures – any structure where tension can be applied for discovery of ideas and information. Many structures will be temporary. People do not want change that comes too fast, so the best option is to make people part of the change process and part of the feedback loops. Teach others to push even farther into their community or other communities to create secondary and tertiary effects. This process can start at all levels but may also leapfrog levels of the local or larger hierarchy in order to Focus on a Few individuals (FOF), DM’s, or communities.

Taiwan Perimeter – A Structural Solution

Looking at the situation in Taiwan from the Taiwan perspective, one can understand the mixed feelings since Taiwanese are ethnically and culturally very close to the Chinese. Yet they have their own country independent of China and do not want to be given promises, then swallowed up like Hong Kong. A structural solution might be beneficial. Taiwan could invite a number of friendly countries to create settlements along their coast, each allowed approximately one square kilometer with access to the sea. A wall or barrier controlled by Taiwan might surround that square kilometer (on 3 sides) so that the invited country remains separate. From the air it would look like a square-tooth saw. If China invades Taiwan they will have to get past these many teeth. This increases the perimeter length of Taiwan just a bit and, on the positive side, may allow for more trade if that is what the various parties agree to. Rather than become more isolated, the future nation-state may be more intermingled with its neighbors, bringing both enemies and friends closer.

Focus on a Few (FOF)

Creating good feedback is key for any kind of government. But how does one start the change process with feedback to the decision makers, to neighborhood communities, or other grassroots people? Use friendly competition to give feedback from many individuals or SG’s to one DM using the upside-down pyramid power. The metaphor here is that of a magnifying glass focusing the sun’s rays on one spot. This requires some coordination, but it can push for change.

FOF can be positive or negative. It can also be used in a positive way to push individuals uphill into a professional role (though it cannot guarantee a professional degree). Maybe push someone to learn a foreign language to expand their capacity to communicate. Focus many on one or two people, one or two DM’s.

We can challenge others, even those outside our own country. People can be invited or challenged to play a game like baseball, but in which they make decisions for other people in other communities. Even if there is no acceptance of the SG’s ideas, their world has been enlarged a bit. Another strategy – After a round or two invite (you pick) and challenge others from those communities to be part of an SG.

OPOV versus Dynamic Democracy?

What of the one-person-one-vote (OPOV) democracy? Is this the best we can do? Is it nimble or flexible enough to survive a changing environment? A better solution for a faster changing environment is the Dynamic Democracy such as the one suggested as a solution for Israel-Palestine. No matter what their percent of the voting public, secular Jews can control the military and national security because of outside threats, but other government functions can be headed by various other groups. Like the Treaty of Westphalia, it can work if there is an agreement by the leaders or the people who sign an agreement.

Dynamic Democracy goes beyond majority rule to incorporate specific feedback loops. An example might be some specific question about the federal debt given to the voters with a January birthday. They may not have special voting rights but can provide useful information as FB, both to other voters and politicians. There is a need for specific FB on many issues, but especially in conflict areas SG may have to incorporate people with knowledge of the situation such as the conflict in Haiti. Bringing in outside militia to Haiti may be a temporary solution but it is also top-down and susceptible to misinformation by the people taking control.

If money warps useful information, Move the Money (MTM).

Instead of supporting specific political parties or interest groups, we can pay each other to gather and filter information. If necessary, currency can be created among small groups where accountability can be done on a frequent basis. Create a Division of Labor for gathering and filtering information (DIG) on the many issues that need attention. Divide by the day and month of birth, Age, Gender, Race, Religion. Almost any division will work since other filters may also be added later.

Intermediate (time, position) Goals are set locally. Push to make decisions.

Goals can be intermediate in time, place. Push all directions. Push-Pull others to make decisions, both small and large. Share UI if possible. Push discovery and tools of communication. This does not require salesmanship. Instead challenge others to search and discover. Make the enemy more stable? Yes. Who has the most powerful God, the God who takes care of everyone? Make this your Story.

3. Use Small Groups (SG) and Gradients to find and filter Useful Information.

Then use this UI as FB for Decision Makers and others.

Moving Useful Information (MUI) is Not the same as surveillance. Do Not get rid of privacy. In fact, privacy is part of the SG process and essential to finding UI. We do not need to make everything transparent.

Increase interaction, not isolation. Develop and discover good Questions – another role for SG. Ask both general and specific questions. Finding a workaround for a specific Decision Maker or Politician who will not or cannot listen.

SG tasks include the gathering and filtering of information. SG can meet online or face-to-face. Participants can use any source of information and share the best sources with others. To extend the example given above – the Division of IG among SG’s might be a division by birth month: January BD – an economic question; February BD –a defense issue; March BD – a social issue.

Work to make the process efficient. Leaders with little time and strained resources will make people wait in line with petitions or requests, then make them go to the back of the line again. We need a workaround. If only BOG-power is used, then it becomes difficult to Move Useful Information (MUI) up the ladder.

Specific issues can start anywhere on any level. Start with a Question or an Idea. Then fin a Small Group. Create gradients. Do several rounds of Small Group work before approaching a Decision Maker with Feedback. Some issues may require privacy and deniability.

4. Use of Friendly Competition to create gradients and increase interaction.

Better input creates better output for DM’s and for us all. This includes having good mental models and group processes. To use friendly competition for creating gradients or incentives, each participant could bring few dollars for a prize. Set up places and processes for people to talk, even about difficult issues and with people they don’t know or like much. Push others just beyond their reach and to make decisions. Results can be tested by other SG’s.

Gradients can be created to decrease Negative Tension that leads to conflict. Crowd funding can create a gradient and a general direction, but more specific information filters are needed to move a community toward stability and sustainability. When gradients are created to decrease negative tensions we should expect something from both sides of the conflict. who

5. Push Uphill (PUH) and Beyond the Border (BTB)

Immigration issues have shown that borders are important. We can go beyond the borders to create safe zones in other countries using these processes and decrease the pressure of immigration. How do we do that? Find someone who knows someone else who can contact or travel to the target town. Being a “Target Town” (like “Target Learner”) is mostly a positive thing since it implies expectations and a willingness for outsiders to invest time and resources to push them onto a sustainable path. Invest at least several days or weeks (months at the most) before moving on. The time period should be similar to how much time it takes to show people how to play baseball or any new game they have never seen before.

Examples and Possible Applications for Small Group feedback:

Health Care and Education; Catch up on school lost because of Covid. This could be specific grade-level work. Teachers might help as consultants but if no teachers are available, then SG’s can do it alone. Health Care – diabetes, obesity, competition to decrease fentanyl abuse and other addictions. Use hypothetical cases if real cases are unavailable. Domestic violence, inner city violence, or violence Beyond The Border (BTB) are possible applications; Sanitation projects; Homelessness is a current political football in major US cities. Many of the Homeless can be participants and make decisions as part of a SG team and may offer insights to the right Questions or even to help to discover what the right Questions should be. In all of these, we may find that current governments have no time or resources. Yet fundamental changes can happen with good information gathering.

OBOR – Structures and Small Groups for the International Arena

Another example might be the One Belt One Road (OBOR) that China is pursuing. China is not doing this simply for the benefit of other countries but also to expand China’s hegemony to a larger part of the world. Taking out a few links from the belt is one strategy to counteract the process but this cannot be done at the leadership level alone. We can push the target link country to become self-sufficient so that they don’t need China. Traditional foreign aid that starts with leader-to-leader talks may be inadequate. That type of structure lends itself to corruption that creeps in and money disappears. Targeting these link countries must include all levels of society: teachers in one country working with teachers in the target country, farmers with farmers, business people with business people. Make the projects small, quick and efficient. The goal is not simply getting acquainted with other people but rather pushing and pulling people to make decisions. Start with FOF.

Parallel Information Sources and The Deep State

The NS might need an enemy, but does it need a Deep State also? Probably not. The function of Intelligence will still be needed to provide useful information for Legislators and the Executive Branch to make better decisions. However, a Deep State that is not accountable is a problem. It may be difficult to de-construct the agencies and then re-build them. Here a mental model of a parallel bridge structure can help, not unlike the parallel bridge built in San Francisco after the earthquake. Take the 195 (approx. 200) countries existing around the world and divide them among the 50 states so that each state is responsible for about 4 countries. Each state can use any process to gather what they believe is useful information on their 4 countries and present it to Congress and the Executive Branch who can then compare that information with what they get from the current Intel Services. Discrepancies should be explored, but it would provide a bridge to Intel agencies who are truly accountable to Congress and the President. This is a task-specific project that can be done by the 50 States or by a private-public combination.

Local or Regional Decisions on AI

One of the best uses of Artificial Intelligence is to increase the Real Intelligence of people learning anything new. The downside of AI is becoming evident when nation-states use both AI and drones for surveillance. At the present time, AI is also being used to target civilians in war-like situations. If the community is the basis for morality, then any use of AI or drones should be cleared by each community who must concomitantly take responsibility for creating a safe place to live.

Unless there is a visionary leader, one cannot start at the top. And because they are busy with other things, grassroots people are not usually organized until they have a task, some tools, a structure, and possibly an incentive or gradient.

Starting a SG & PUH

Are we changing the people at the top or at the grassroots, or are we simply changing the structure within which we act? There will be resistance to any change from family, friends, and colleagues who say they have your best interests in mind and do not want you to do anything that might look “stupid”. Is that good advice or are they simply afraid? The irony is that our source of love (family, friends, and community) can also be the major source of resistance to any change.

The Target person may say they have “no interest” but they can still participate since we are looking at the learning process itself, not necessarily with playing permanent roles. We are also not taking an academic test. The power of the target learner is that, for a short period of time, he or she has a team to help find and filter useful information.

Are we “challenging” people or “selling” to them. Maybe some of both, but a straightforward challenge may help to decrease the effects of guilt and it will become easier to pose further challenges. Think about how the sport of baseball or other team sports spread from town to town, even at the kid level. The SG information processes will be similar. It may be easier to pick Target Learner from outside your own group to Push Uphill.

Must we make the nation-state disappear – or evolve? Can we balance the system with better FB? An application of better FB will help a better system emerge. We can follow Hans Morgenthau and believe in balance over dominance.

josuterdotcom

Tag: communication

Is Democracy the Problem?

States of Syria

Evolution or End of the Nation-State?, Part C – Principles of Design for Change