Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: End Run Around Govt Corruption: Citizens Deliberative Councils  (Read 18553 times)

rossby

  • Director of Development
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4801

Okay. Thanks. I wonder if it had much support.

Google "HCR 6".
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

Not with anyone that already can read the NH Constitution.
Logged

OnLifeAndLiberty.com - Erik

  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 53
  • Give trade a chance!
    • On Life and Liberty

Hi Luck,

While I encourage you to write down and describe your motivations, such as you have, I think the main problem with your Declaration is the usage of very subjective words. Specifically, basing the document on the idea of "corruption" is problematic because it's debatable and its a question of extent.

I could make the case that politicians are corrupt to various degrees, but not that some are corrupt and some not. Further, we'd all have different ideas of what it means to be corrupt. Is accepting money from certain constituents in order help your campaign corrupt? Well, I don't think so, but many would.

By basing your declaration on the argument that government has just recently become corrupt, you set yourself up for instant critique. Wasn't government just as corrupt 20 years ago? What about 50 or 100 years ago? 

Further, try not to use terms like "patriotic."  What does it mean? It's totally subjective... some would label us freedom lovers as "unpatriotic" because we don't support militant overseas aggression. "Patriotism" is one of those terms that is used so loosely as to have lost its meaning.

Further, you specify certain actions which you don't want the government to engage in, such as bailouts and vote fraud.  Well, nobody wants vote fraud, and bailouts are really a minor phenomenon in government - only recently have they become contentious. I think a document declaring independence and a broad statement of good governance should avoid such narrow issues... preferring instead to underscore the principles which make all the little issues wrong. For example, highlighting the principle that one has a right to his own wealth, if agreed upon, would prevent such things as bailouts and countless other evils that will occur periodically.

Try focusing on broad ideas, not the immediately relevant issues of the day, if you want to create a beautiful, lasting narrative that captures the hearts and minds of people.
Logged

Deanotrek

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26

As Utopian as this sounds we must be realistic, and neutral in our use of the word government. The D of I declares that it is the right of people to set up a new government when there is one that HAS BECOME CORRUPT. Jefferson then gave the reasons that government should exist. that is to SECURE THE RIGHTS of the people, and their property. To set up a government on the premise that all government is corrupt will never get the necessary numbers to even come close to becoming a reality. I believe we need to work within the framework of the constitution that we have, and elect people that represent freedom and liberty the way it was originally intended. Once we get this done we can work on improving things by ratifying amendments to the constitution, among these would be sound money, term limits, and the dismantling of federal programs that do not adhere to the constitution, and handing the resposibility to the people and representatives of each state and let them decide if they want such programs.

We can all live in an alternate reality where we try to change the system entirely, or we can work together within the system to make actual changes that make things better for more people. In a perfect world anarchy would work, but this world is far from a perfect world, and the United States started as the best nation in history to recognize human rights. WE ALL MUST WORK WITHIN THIS SYSTEM IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE REAL CHANGE IN THE SHORTEST AMOUNT OF TIME. Voting for the right people as representatives is a must for all people who want freedom, and libery.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

There is no such thing as Sound Money.
Term Limits simply limit the choices of representation.
And the States are currently determining which programs they wish...



Logged

Deanotrek

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26

I WAS AT THE COURTHOUSE WHEN THE VOTE WENT DOWN. IT WAS IN THE 150'S FOR AND 220'S AGAINST.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native

Why was there a vote in the Courthouse? And what was being voted on?
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3065

* I just read that this U.S. law below was passed in 1991, which supports or honors Zionist Law, which calls for beheading anyone who "worships" Jesus etc. That was in Bush, Sr's administration.
* Bush, Jr had many Zionists in his administration, who were strong backers of the wars with Iraq, Afghanistan etc. It's ironic that so many Christians supported Bush, while his policies were largely anti-Christian. Iraq had more Christians than most any other Middle East nation and the new Muslim govt there forbids Christian worship.

APPENDIX ONE 105 STAT. 44 PUBLIC LAW 102-14-MAR. 20,1991 Public Law 102-14 102d Congress Joint Resolution Mar. 20. 1991 [H.J Res 104] To designate March 26. 1991, as "Education Day. U. S. A." Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our, great Nation was founded;

Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

Whereas without these ethical values and principles the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos;

Whereas society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society;

Whereas the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility to transmit these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future;

Whereas the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world;

Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March 26, 1991:

Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, "the rebbe", this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of "education and giving", the year in which we turn to education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws: and

Whereas this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state:

Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That March 26, 1991, the start of the ninetieth year of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, leader of the worldwide Lutbavitch movement. is designated as "Education Day. U.S.A.". The President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and activities. PUBLIC LAW 102-14-MAR. 20,1991 105 STAT. 45 Approved March 20, 1991 LEGISLATIVE HISTORY-H.J Res 104 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vol 137. (1991) Mar 5. considered and passed House Mar 7. considered and passed Senate 56
Logged

preparehandbook

  • Guest
Re: Declaration of Independence from Corrupt Government [New: NH Declaration?]
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2010, 07:46:40 pm »

An unconstitutional law is no law.

If indeed this "zionist law" was passed it would be completely unenforceable. But honestly I think this is some sort of internet ghost. When I tried to google it all I found was circles and self referential examples.
Logged

John Edward Mercier

  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6534
  • Native
Re: Declaration of Independence from Corrupt Government [New: NH Declaration?]
« Reply #24 on: November 09, 2010, 05:10:26 pm »

Actually you might want to learn about the Intolerable Acts. These were the foundation for the American Revolution.
In fact, early American history shows more than a willingness by the Founding Fathers to use government to their own purposes.
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3065
Re: Declaration of Independence from Corrupt Government [New: NH Declaration?]
« Reply #25 on: January 17, 2012, 09:09:29 pm »

The Occupy Movement is now trying to Occupy the Courts
http://movetoamend.org/organizing-resources/declaration-independence-corporate-rule

Declaration of Independence from Corporate Rule

Proclaim the independence of all levels of our government from the domination of corporations. Download .pdfs and .doc versions of this timely re-write of the Declaration:

    We the People of the United States, in order to make democracy real and justice possible, to defend against oppression, to fight for the welfare of all, to liberate our minds and hearts, and to safeguard our pocketbooks from the clutches of corporations, do hereby declare our independence from corporate rule, shouting for all to hear that:

        Corporations are not human persons and have no inherent inalienable human rights under the Constitution
        Money is not speech. Money is concentrated capital and it cannot speak.
        Communities have the right to decide what happens to their land, their homes, their health, their local businesses, and all their citizens--children, elders, sick and poor. Corporations do not.

Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3065
Re: End Run Around Govt Corruption: Citizens Deliberative Councils (NEW)
« Reply #26 on: November 04, 2013, 09:42:37 am »

Empowering Public Wisdom

PART I

Brief Introduction

A revitalized democracy must tap into three types of power: power over, power with, and power from within []
I saw somewhere recently that the ideal personality type, for a central banker, is psychopathological. And a huff post  columnist speculates that Greed itself is psychopathological. And of course, those of us who speculate on the motives  of the “cabal” realize that at the very least they must have a very different set of values than the rest of us “normals.” [] { http://exopermaculture.com }

{Short Excerpt from} "Greed as Psycho-Pathology and Addiction"
by Mitchell J. Rabin, Holistic psychotherapist and host [of] A Better World Radio
http://huffingtonpost.com/mitchell-j-rabin/greed-as-psychopathology-_b_1656791.html []

I'm suggesting that greed, which is the pursuit and acquisition of money at any expense, is a pathological activity, is  actually an addiction, and should be societally regarded as such. When it harms others or the environment, it is also a  form of criminal insanity and should be treated legally and psychologically as such. It is currently ruining our society,  the lack of leadership in the White House and Congress continues to condone the unethical and often illegal but  unprosecuted acts, and as a result, our government and elected officials are complicit in these ongoing acts which were  not stopped when our economy was crippled -- again -- in September 2008. Glass-Steagall, the strongest piece of  legislation to criminalize the combining of different banking activities, was not reinstated, and the political will to do  so is faint. When we as a People, recognize that we are giving energy to the addicted criminals because of the high  regard in which we collectively view the wealthy, as somehow beyond reproach, then we will start to see more  legislation to criminalize these activities, to reinstate Glass-Steagall and to treat the pathology of greed as an addiction,  fundamentally based on a profound fear 'of Not Enough' as well as "I'm not good enough", the deep wound of the  greedy, miser-Midas archetype, that dominates their psyche. []

--------------

Empowering Public Wisdom
1. http://exopermaculture.com/2012/08/10/a-revitalized-democracy-must-tap-into-three-types-of-power-power-over-power-with-and-power-from-within/
2. http://www.realitysandwich.com/blog/83277

{Highlights}

Chapter 1, A Practical Vision of Citizen-Led Politics []

The [] strategy to make concentrated power more benign is to make it answerable to those over whom it is exercised.  This is why government transparency, investigative journalism, whistleblowers, and civilian oversight of police,  military, and intelligence services are so important. Elections also constitute a powerful form of answerability, if they  are fair and done in a context where we, the people, actually know what public officials have been doing and who is  funding their electoral campaigns. The answerability principle is also why corporations—some of which are arguably  the best examples of concentrated power on earth today—are supposed to be chartered by the community or state, and  their performance reviewed before the charter is periodically renewed or withdrawn. If a group, organization, or person  with undue concentrated power resists all efforts to balance their power or make it answerable, that power needs be  broken up and/or its functions distributed to others. This is usually quite difficult, but we’ve seen examples ranging  from antitrust laws to the American Revolution. One way or another, if we wish to preserve our democracy we must  mitigate the toxic tendencies of concentrated power. However—and this is a key point—all these safeguards are only  necessary [when] we’re talking about power-over [, not] power-with [or ] power from within. []
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 11:04:38 am by Luck »
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3065
Re: End Run Around Govt Corruption: Citizens Deliberative Councils (NEW)
« Reply #27 on: November 04, 2013, 09:46:35 am »

PART II

Chapter 3: Why We Need Public Wisdom []

We are in a time of mounting and increasingly interrelated crises—economic, political, social, and ecological. These  problems will not resolve easily. The longer we go without wisely addressing them, the more complex, resistant,  entangled, and dangerous they become. [] One way or another, something is going to shift. It is hard to imagine how that  shift will be positive unless we can muster the collective wisdom to guide it in life-serving directions. We can only do  that if we make a real effort—as a society— to take into account everything that needs to be taken into account to  generate long-term inclusive benefits.

Chapter 4: Public Wisdom: Its Role, Its Sources, and Its Limitations

We need public wisdom
    to advise our leaders (elected and otherwise);
    to keep officials and others in power answerable;
    to inform and advise individual citizens (especially voters);
    to awaken the public will and power of whole communities;
    to tap into and reflect on the knowledge of experts, while keeping them in their place (they need to be on tap, not on  top); and, in some cases,
    to directly make some of the most important decisions our society faces. []
[Public] wisdom [] arises from our informed conversation as we—or groups of our fellow citizens who are as diverse  as we are—seek shared understanding, shared solutions, and shared vision to guide the life of our shared community or  society into our shared future. []

How conversations are set up makes all the difference in the world. [] Conversations that generate public wisdom offer  a full spectrum of relevant perspectives that are diverse in terms of both the information made available to the  participants and the views of the participants themselves []. [] Such conversations also do the following:
    help participants discern and investigate lies and manipulation;
    ensure that every voice is really heard—and that every person feels well heard;
    clearly describe what the participants are being asked to do and how any results will be used;
    engage productively with differences, disturbances, and expressions of emotion;
    help participants step out of oversimplifications to creatively tackle the true complexity of real situations. []

By giving us the challenge to pursue the common good in the face of all our differences, and then helping us to really  hear each other, powerful conversational approaches lead us progressively into what I call the core commons of our  life. [] [T]his is the fundamental tool: diverse people interacting in conversations that help them ground in their natural  common humanity and life. When we are successful at that, we are well on the road to group wisdom.

Seek agreements that are truly inclusive. To the extent lots of people contribute to, engage with, and believe in an  agreement, that agreement will wisely address what needs to be addressed and will get implemented well. At the very  least, don’t be satisfied with mere majority voting, which depends on majority domination and leaves a significant  minority dissatisfied. Dig deeper into shared values and needs. Every step of the way, seek out people’s concerns and  take them seriously to see if they can be satisfied in ways that move group support closer to a supermajority (67 percent  or more) or a consensus or breakthrough that all participants are pleased with. []

The work of Edward Tufte explores how to present data in meaningful visual ways, and argument mapping and framing  for deliberation cover the presentation of diverse perspectives in ways that make them easy to understand and compare.  []

CHAPTER 5: Citizenship and the Random Selection of Ad Hoc Mini-Publics []

Two strategies can help disrupt [corruption] dynamics: random selection and limited time in office. If decision-makers  are randomly selected and therefore unpredictable, neither they nor special interests can prepare to manipulate their  power for personal or partisan gain. [] Putting these two strategies together creates a new possibility for all citizens in a  democracy. They can delegate some {of} their decision-making power to temporary panels of randomly selected  ordinary citizens. [] Random selection is not a wild new idea. It has a long and interesting history. [] In the past forty  years people around the world have been experimenting with new forms of mini-publics containing from only twelve  up to two hundred randomly selected citizens for facilitated deliberations lasting from several days to several weeks  spread over several months. Hundreds of these kinds of ad hoc mini-publics have been convened, but few have been set  up to have an institutionalized impact on policy. Yet their very existence creates a new, deeper form of citizenship than  we’re used to, and a new, more inclusive public voice in the political discourse. []

How different it would be to have members of such a panel, when they have completed their work, appear on talk  shows to discuss what they came up with and what it was like to learn about the issue, talk with each other, and act! []   It shouldn’t be too large or too small—or deliberate for too long or too short a time. Like a trial jury, it needs legal and  procedural safeguards to protect it from manipulation. It needs dependable information—and help understanding that  information. It needs good facilitation, and we need to ensure that the facilitation can’t be abused. [] In addition to those  challenges, most existing forms of citizen deliberative councils are expensive []. So we need to develop less expensive  versions that can still generate legitimate public wisdom. [] Public wisdom, like liberty, requires both good systemic  design and constant vigilance. [] The latest trends in revitalizing democracy focus on mass participation []. []
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 09:51:03 am by Luck »
Logged

Luck

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3065
Re: End Run Around Govt Corruption: Citizens Deliberative Councils (NEW)
« Reply #28 on: November 04, 2013, 09:48:17 am »

PART III

CHAPTER 6: Citizen Deliberative Councils: Their Character, Variety, and History []

[A] citizens deliberative council['s] [] deliberations are informed by inclusive, balanced briefing materials and, usually,  interviews with, testimony from, and/or conversations with diverse experts, advocates, and other stakeholders involved  with the matter under consideration. At its conclusion, it releases its findings and recommendations to its convening  authority, concerned officials, the media, the electorate, and/or the larger community from which its members came— and then it disbands. Ideally, the report stimulates further community dialogue, some of which may be purposefully  convened and/or reported on as part of the overall process. []

In 1974 [] several civic leaders founded the Jefferson Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota, to research and develop the  Citizens Jury process (along with another process called “Extended Policy Discussion,” which was designed to clarify  disagreements between experts on public policy matters in a way that would be useful for legislators). The first Citizens  Jury on an issue was in 1974 and the first to examine candidates for office was in 1976. In 1984 a Citizens Jury was  conducted for the first time with government sponsorship. As of this writing, the Jefferson Center has organized thirty- two Citizens Juries. The integrity of the Citizens Jury process is integral to its design, including transparency, on-going  evaluations, and final reports written by the participants. Reports on all Jefferson Center Citizens Juries and a complete  manual on conducting this form of citizen deliberation are available free on the Jefferson Center website,  http://jeffersoncenter.org . [] Many other people have since used this method. In its many variations, the Citizens Jury is  the most widely used and thoroughly tested and reviewed model of citizen deliberative council in the world, and it has  inspired many creative applications and versions. []

In the early 1980s, consultant Jim Rough developed [] Dynamic Facilitation. At the beginning of the process,  participants address their thoughts and feelings to the facilitator, who “reflects” them back in ways that ensure each  speaker feels fully heard, including recording their contributions on chart pads labeled “problem statements,” “possible  solutions,” “concerns,” and “data.” When anyone complains about something, the facilitator asks (after reflecting the  complaint), “What do you think should be done about that?” or “If you were in charge, what would you do about it?” —channeling participants’ thinking toward solving the problem without privileging any particular solution, just  recording them all on the “possible solutions” chart pad. If someone starts to argue with or invalidate what another  participant has said, the facilitator asks, with real curiosity, “What’s your concern?”—and, after reflecting and  recording his or her concern, asks what the conflicted person would do about it. This aspect of Dynamic Facilitation— translating conflict into concerns—composts antagonism into creativity. []

There have been experiments with “televote” audiences, large groups of citizens who watch citizen deliberations on  television or online and periodically engage with the citizen deliberators by phone or online, providing feedback during  the deliberative process. Since the public owns the airwaves at the local level and broadcasters must serve the public  interest, communities can and should work with them to present citizen deliberations on issues vital to the community.  Another variation involves open participation public deliberations and debates carried on online before or during the  face-to-face ones occurring in the citizen deliberative councils, with some crossovers between the two conversations. In  an Australian initiative, members of the larger random pool from which the citizen deliberators were selected were  invited to participate in online collaborative work to create the deliberators’ agenda. Nowadays, official participants in  citizen deliberative councils could also use blogs, chats, tweets, live conference calls, or other technologies to engage  citizen observers as ad hoc participants or to engage the public with their council’s concluding recommendations. []

CHAPTER 7: How Citizen Deliberative Councils Could and Should Be Used []

Citizen deliberative councils (CDCs) could and should play many roles, [such as] []
- Providing Periodic Citizen-Based “State of the Union” Declarations []
- Studying Issues on Behalf of the Public and Public Officials []
- Reviewing Proposed Ballot Initiatives and Referenda []
- Creating Proposed Ballot Initiatives to Deal with Identified Issues []
- Ensuring Sober Public Evaluation of Controversial Legislation []
- Reviewing Candidates for Elected Public Office []
- Reviewing Government Budgets []
- Reviewing Government or Corporate Performance [].

Chapter 8: Public Empowerment, Public Engagement, and the Role of Journalism []

So how do we use citizen deliberative councils strategically to empower public wisdom? What can we do to make such  councils part of our usual political process? []
- Convene processes like Wisdom Councils to evoke the public’s awareness of their collective wisdom and power as  We the People. []
- Organize public campaigns to demand that public wisdom processes be given official or unofficial advisory roles in  government decision making. [] We can also solicit pledges from politicians stating that they will take seriously the  recommendations from a properly convened citizen deliberative council—that is, they will either do what it says or  publicly explain why they can’t or won’t. An example of such a pledge can be found at www.co-intelligence.org/PoliticiansPledge.html .
- Convene public wisdom processes to advise voters on issues and/or candidates—and actively publicize their  recommendations. Oregon’s official Citizens’ Initiative Review process uses a citizen deliberative council to review  ballot initiatives and referenda on behalf of the voters. []
- Create a lobbying network or political party specifically dedicated to pushing the policy recommendations generated  through public wisdom processes. This has not yet happened, but there are precursors showing up in some parts of the  transpartisan movement, bringing people from the Left and the Right together and then promoting what they come up  with. []
- Create nonpartisan political organizing websites that help citizens find others who share their passion on specific  policy options. []
- Convene public wisdom processes and promote their findings to advocacy groups who already favor the policies the  wisdom process recommends. []
- Build an alliance of issue-oriented groups who have concluded that their pet issues won’t get far without changing the  decision-making machinery that decides policy on all issues. []
- Create internet-based systems that enable grassroots activists to affordably self-organize public wisdom processes on  whatever issues they or their community are working [], whenever they need [] or want to.
- Promote the establishment of a fourth branch of government that functions through the deliberations of randomly  selected citizen panels. []

Journalists and Other Storytellers

This cannot, of course, be done without considerable public awareness and engagement—before, during, and after  initiatives like these are undertaken. Key to such engagement is the inspired involvement of activists, philanthropists,  social networkers, and the many storytellers of our society []: writers, musicians, moviemakers, artists, actors, media  pundits, public-relations people, politicians, and teachers. The most important [] are journalists.
« Last Edit: November 04, 2013, 10:46:13 am by Luck »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up