Website © 2014 Ben Collins
political economic theory hopism
Hopism is political theory written by an ordinary person with ordinary aspirations for life. Hopism recognises and accepts human nature’s weaknesses and strengths and tries to build a realistic framework to create a society of low tax, high social service and low waste.
This is Hopism-Beta-Edition, republished again after a four year break due to background issues. It is still edition 1 and could do with some editing, better english, slicker graphics, some videos and many more diagrams. That will get done sometime during rainy dark November 2014, together with a discussion forum, where this rough idea can be beaten into shape and better written by contributors.
The end result is more useful work done, a happier society and more free time to enjoy your life - whilst knowing that social obligations are met.
Hopism is short and sweet
Hopism is under development, there will be bits you like and bits you dont, maybe there could be different splinter variants. The theory itself is simple and should take less than an afternoon to understand. There are around twenty texts on the webring, each less than a thousand words.
| loanism | non-jobs | nonetarism | corruptation | crimecancer | mortgageslavery |
you are here
Democracy comes from the Greek word Demos-Kratei which means the people to rule.
What we have now in the West is a fraud masquerading as democracy, that the political benefactors love to dress up as democracy.
Currently people are voting for five year political dictatorships, with a go or stay option at the end. That is not people ruling, merely politicians playing at power games with a chuck out clause after five years. This is pathetic sham democracy!
Folkcracy is an advanced e-based democracy where policy is decided directly by the people, issue by issue.
Every month an issue is discussed in the media by politicians and the people listen to arguments then cast their vote. Each issue is individualised and runs in a four year circuit. Politicians current five year omnipetence is ended, but in a different way their relevance increases as they get to do what they are supposed to do, espose policy and persuade people to follow their line of thought. The media gets to play a central role presenting the opinions and whipping up interest in each issue. Suddenly we feel inclusive and empowered in our society. No longer we will give free rein to a select few career politicans with tv acceptable faces to run wild with their half baked ideas for five years.
Decisions are federalised i.e. made locally and nationally where appropriate, this allows different results regionally which then allows social variation and result analysis. Where one policy succeeds or fails, it can be distributed or ended as appropriate according to the next round of folkcracy voting.
It is time for real direct democracy not this statistically warped Yay or Nay ”democracy” once every five years. It is not a question of if, only when direct democracy begins. Let us make it happen soon.
The Swiss have already introduced a form of direct democracy. The exact form of folkcracy is under evaluation and requires contribution from various people. Perhaps an ideal system has already been proposed historically, or perhaps we can meld the best of several proposals to develop the ultimate in real democracy.
Contributions welcome and more on this soon!
Current democracy the world over is a farce. A vote once every five years to allow a bunch of failed lawyers and intellectual dreamers to run things omnipetently for long periods is not a recipe for success. These career politicians have never suffered in a tedious job, nor created anything useful. This system fails to individualise issues and policies. The result is a vague mush of egocentric personalities and semi-organised headless chickens desperate to hang on to power.
What exactly are you voting for at a five year election; people, policy or party? How can you vote on policy when they are all jumbled up together? The bottom line is we do not need to rely on people or the parties to hold their promises, once we vote directly for individualised policy we will all get the policies we vote for.
The politicians will still have a role to play as executers of policy and parties will still exist to decide group policy. The main argument used against direct democracy is cost, but with the right software and electronic notices, costs can be decimated and streamlined according to ultra organisation principles.