When capitalism and communism will become anachronism: A New Form of Democracy.

Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#1
[FONT=&quot]When capitalism and communism will become anachronism, "the messiahs" of new political religions will continue to proselytize "lost sheep" and set them at loggerheads for the purpose of the own crowning. But the chronic error freedom fighters provoking lovers of royal honors and arbitrary rule, will remain former.

[FONT=&quot]Lenin's errors (and not only his):

[FONT=&quot]1. Monopoly of one political idea leads to the inevitable formation of a caste which serves it, to the cult of "The Supreme priest' and to the alienation from the rest of society. The caste pursues the interests of the caste exclusively. It is a monarchy again instead of a republic. "The Dragon is dead, long live the Dragon!"

[FONT=&quot]2. The monopoly idea creates an imbalance in the society, and retention of its domination demands regular disinformation (the lie) and physical violence in Soviet Russia, such as the Kronstadt rebellion, the Gulags, Novocherkassk - June 1962', Prague-68, the Iron Curtain, among other flagrant examples of rebellions dealt with in a horrendously repressive way.

[FONT=&quot]3. Self-preservation of a monopoly and social privileges of the 'high priests' require the suppression of new ideas. The lack of renewal and of healthy competition leads to degeneration.

[FONT=&quot]4. The unipolarity which controls autocracies leaves the possibility for shadow protectionism; corruption destroys the state from within. / [FONT=&quot]The corruption can be minimized by means of cross-checking of several independent and competing parties in power. /

[FONT=&quot]5. The traditional pyramid of power is too dependent on the personal qualities and political orientation of the leader and his "cheerleading group": in Soviet Russia, from authoritarian Stalin, who built a socialist super state based on criminal rules, to shortsighted , idle talker Gorbachev, who betrayed the fates of millions by one weak-willed phrase to the kulak werewolf and drunkard Yeltsin. That this pyramid is unstable and vulnerable was thus proved!

[FONT=&quot]6. A new society begins with a reform of the means of power. Lenin was to have bequeathed not a successor, but an innovation in management: 'the development spiral' returns to an obsolete level without a new system of management. So Russia returned to the monarchic National Emblem, a two-headed clownish mockery of modern Russian 'democracy'.
[FONT=&quot]/ Incidentally, and two-party political ?football? is a fascinating show for the common people, which distracts from the Sedition ("bread and circuses!"), but with the winning score is invariably in favour of the sponsors' top. /

[FONT=&quot]Read more: OpEdNews - Article: Three Ways to the Future - A New Form of Democracy. http://www.opednews.com/articles/Three-Ways-to-the-Future--by-Nicholas-Popov--e-101020-737.html

[FONT=&quot]The new management idea resolves contradictions between different ideologies by means of the constructive rivalry within a united team and directs energy of their leaders to the benefit of the entire society, and also frees healthy the potential of the society itself. It is the power of Collective Wisdom and Common Sense.

[FONT=&quot]?Know-how? against Wars and Crises: a New Formula for Democracy. The new meaning of a 5-pointed star!

[FONT=&quot]?Equals with equals are most easily flocked together?

[FONT=&quot]The stalemates primarily indicate a crisis of governance.

[FONT=&quot]Single-party leadership of any political form and colour through inevitable caste egoism foists and accumulates misbalance in the whole society and economy, provokes crises and dangerous regime changes (revolutions, dictatorship) and through the paranoia of ?the fuhrers? it causes wars. Caste egoism inhibits the potential of other, larger part of society.

[FONT=&quot]Does the phrase ?Winner take all? mean that the rest are ?the losing party?? On which side will YOU find yourself? Is it wise to give initiatives and decisions concerning the whole society to the one-sided point of view? Objectivity and justice cannot be unilateral!

[FONT=&quot]The self-balancing power of five Independent parties with a movable centre of joint decisions would be more broad-minded, enterprising, protected by Collective Wisdom and would fit into society more adequately. The five [view angles] make up the minimum for self-balance. 5-pointed star is a symbol of objectivity (of wisdom) in power. The morning of a new, energetic and harmonious civilization will begin with the Rise of a refreshed star!

[FONT=&quot]


[FONT=&quot]THE IDEA OF A SELF-BALANCING POWER.
[FONT=&quot]Attention: the mechanism that is spelled out below, is built on feedback!

[FONT=&quot]Collective interests of the whole society are presented in the governance of five Independent political parties simultaneously. In every party there is a team of experts in different fields.

[FONT=&quot]The favourite of most voters will have initial 2 votes out of 6, but the 2-votes advantage will be ?floating?. The accepted decisions are the result of a balance of contradictions and compromises among the leaders within power.

[FONT=&quot]Any party of five has the right of initiatives.
[FONT=&quot]The realization of suggestions impels seeking allies and go to compromises. The decision can be taken at the half of the votes. If the solution is blocked by another half, the right of the new edition and the 2-votes advantage go to the leader of the second (regarding the number of voters) party.

[FONT=&quot]In case of repeated lock, either:
[FONT=&quot]1. The 2-votes advantage on the current theme goes to the communicator with a new alternative, which is supported by at least one participant from each block, or by mutual agreement. The conflict can be resolved using the Edgeworth Method with the participation of thematic experts of 5 sides only. Any of the leaders has the right to abandon the decision.
[FONT=&quot]2. Final lock. The one provoking regular locks loses the right for initiatives, the three least (for the number of voters) parties can be updated from a reserve.

[FONT=&quot]The three least parties are not enough in order to take separate initiatives?. Control of ?taken decision? is implemented by participants outside the resolution.
[FONT=&quot]Two- or three party alliance, that exceeded half of all decisions and locks, may claim only for one place in the future team. At least one vacancy in it belongs to 6 new contenders from the non-ruling parties.
[FONT=&quot]Only one of them is ?the entrance ticket? to the Elections for the ruling party, a protege may declare himself off the Elections along with the curator only. It is possible for a trainee to participate as an advisor. The team going to Power for the first time can not be reorganized from functionaries of the ruling parties.

[FONT=&quot]Advertising of the ruling parties? is prohibited, their campaign can be supported with the work done only, opposition may publish an unaccepted version through the mass media. The advertising campaign of new parties can not be financed from private sources and state funds are distributed equally among the contenders.

[FONT=&quot]A ballot paper has 2 columns: Ruling Parties in descending order by the realized solutions rate only (an initiator earns two points, partners receive one, lock withdraws one and two respectively) and new ones, each presents its three basic purposes. If the voter trusts a former ?mon ami?, he puts ?YES?; if not, then he selects the new one with the most needfull priorities. He also has the right to say ?NO? to the most negative of the ruling parties. The negative evaluation may take away up to half of the positive votes.

[FONT=&quot]Read more: http://http://nicholaspopov.wordpress.com/2010/10/25/know-how-against-wars-and-crises-a-new-formula-for-democracy-the-new-meaning-of-a-5-pointed-star/

[FONT=&quot]The five Independent in power means: freedom of initiatives and rivalry?s energy; [FONT=&quot] shrewdness; extended field of variants and balance of the decisions; mutual control; continuity in the policy and the openness to renewal!
[FONT=&quot]A minimum of participants and stages makes the decision-making process dynamic and manageable.

[FONT=&quot]? Stalin had not been allowed to ?miss the boat? of Hitler?s invasion, there would not have been ?conditions for? and fatal consequences of ?the Messiah syndrome?, Brezhnev stagnation, Cold and Hot Wars and ?Khrushchev?s Shoe? ?

[FONT=&quot]And let the Kremlin?s stars light up!

[FONT=&quot]Сделано в России Nicholas Popov 2009
 
Aug 4, 2010
862
0
#4
ah, I'll alert the media

...................................

that post reads like you have poor grammar in your native language and ran it through three or four translators before posting it
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#5
Languages can be different, but it is more important that people should have a joint goals. During World War II Russian and American soldiers found a common language.
Memory of victims is worthy respect. How to make that wars didn't repeat? I write about it.



"And the battle is eternal [between you and me?]! We can only dream of peace?" - Alexander Blok [FONT=&quot]
[FONT=&quot]
 
Last edited:
Aug 4, 2010
862
0
#6
Languages can be different, but it is more important that people should have a joint goals. During World War II Russian and American soldiers found a common language.
Memory of victims is worthy respect. How to make that wars didn't repeat? I write about it.



"And the battle is eternal [between you and me?]! We can only dream of peace?" - Alexander Blok

Soldiers? Yes. However, it is also true that your soldiers and ours weren't friends until after Hitler renegged on the deal Ribbentrop made with Molotov. Your soldiers killed 20,000 of the best and brightest people in Poland because of Beria's bright idea. Many remember Katyn Forest very well.

Remember WWI? The War to end all wars? You guys had a revolution and then signed one of the worst treaties in history of treaties (Brest-Litovsk).... your soldiers didn't fight to help end the war. They retreated and evaporated lengthening the war....

Remember WWII? You guys started out on Hitler's side and only chance and his stupidity changed that.

Your soldiers in Poland behaved as criminals. Not just Katyn. In January 1945 your soldiers waited on the banks of the Vistula and allowed the Wehrmacht to level Warsaw and exterminate Poles at will.

The only common language they found that even given those atrocities I mentioned was that the Germans were worse... in the short run. Over the course of the twentieth century the Soviets proved to be much better at killing their own people than Hitler was at klling Jews. Quite an achievement.

Your soldiers are now used to protected your government gangsters' private fiefdoms in Georgia... South Ossetia is a criminal refuge for Russian Kleptocrats.

You may well be high minded and ashamed of the behavior of your country. Maybe not. I don't much care. Russia is experiencing that last heroic effort of the man who knows he is dying. Your country has population problems. Your society is not repopulating itself. The peoples on your southern border.... all the thousands and thousands of miles of border... those people are not having population replacement issues. Hell, many are willing to blow their children up in order that they might kill a Russian, a Jew or Persian... or Hindi. The importance of Russia in the coming generations will be how to deal with the cultures currently preparing to carve up the huge tracts of land and valuable resources you control.... barely. And how to keep some of those eager wolves from getting your weapons, technology and scientists to threaten other parts of the world. Your government is content for now to play the thorn under our saddle as we try to prevent North Korea and Iran from behaving badly. Your government finds it better to cause us trouble than to help contain those threats. From a geopolitical perspective it makes sense to do this. From the perspective of preventing war it does not. Quite frankly all it does is make war more likely.
 
Last edited:
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#7
You the delightful fighter. Find itself on a picture. My self-portrait is there also. It is bad, when simple people don't understand that them use in the mercenary purposes. Laurels accrue to the wolves, tears - to simple people. "Jedem das seine" ?
I am the internationalist. In addition, Homo Sapiens. And I do not let politicos-swindlers make dirty my brains.

It is sadly.
 
Last edited:
Aug 4, 2010
862
0
#8
You've got an interesting voice I'll give you that.

I hope you understand the frustration and anger in my post was directed at the leaders of your country and not at you.

I am not an internationalist. I am an American exceptionalist. But those who call ourselves that regard it as obligation not a privilege.
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#9
I am glad that you have understood a difference between political fraudsters and victims of their propaganda. Even if they are of one nationality.

I am a man of the planet Earth. Internecine political speculations as nazism, capitalism, communism are alien to me.

I expected constructive discussion and proposals on the topic / "Know-how” against Wars and Crises" /, instead of responsibility for sins of 'my' rulers, who I don't respect, at the minimum.
 
Last edited:
Aug 4, 2010
862
0
#10
Captialism is an economic system... not a political one.

As to the rest of your comments.... fair enough.

Lay on McDuff....

introduce your point or challenge for discussion

lol... Russians... real Russians have always treated me well... No need to tell old stories.

In St. Petersburg and Kiev good people were easy to find. (In Kiev cats were easy to find also). Mockba... sucked
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#11
Capitalism is political religion first of all, in which on an iconostasis there is a dollar bill. People kill other people to bequeath booty to his cat subsequently.
It is a mental insanity, that is a brain damage. Money is the tool only.
I am not a Communist.

"In his will, Ben Rea bequeathed $15 million to his cat, Blackie." :cry:

This money could help many indigent scientists, for instance.
It is good, when only the grandmother suffers marasmus, but it is bad, if all society considers it normal. It is society of lunatics.
Capitalism is not only a economic system.
 
Last edited:
Aug 4, 2010
862
0
#12
Capitalism is an economic system that seeks greater liberty of capital and less government involvement than others. I tend to see it as more of a range on a spectrum than a different breed of cat.

What you are referring to is avarice. An insatiable desire for money. That would be bad. Seeking to earn wealth to support one's family is not. More people fit the second example than the first.

Ben Rea. It is his money. He can do whatever he wants with it. The more authority the state has over his money the less liberty Ben has. One of the aspects of liberty is the freedom to be a dumbass.

Yes, his money could help many people, charities etc. But it is his money.

Most people do not have $15MM. Most who do have $15MM do not give it to their cat.

There are many Americans who give a great deal to charity be it research, aid to the poor, etc.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243496/ list of American Philanthropists... I listed top 5 2009

Stanley F. and Fiona B. Druckenmiller?$705 million
John M. Templeton?$573 million
William H. (Bill) III and Melinda F. Gates?$350 million
Michael R. Bloomberg: $254 million
Louise Dieterle Nippert?$185 million
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#13
I not the Russian cop who without ceremony rummages in another's pocket.
It is a question of extremes. Any 'limitlessness' induces a counterreaction.
Meanwhile, in the nature all processes are self-regulating.
The society will become reasonable and harmonious when contradictions are will resolve within power itself.

It is possible for collective intelligence of independent participants only. Regular imbalance making is a pathology of the outdated system of autocracy. SHE WORKS IN SUCH A WAY.
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#14
Capitalism is an economic system that seeks greater liberty of capital and less government involvement than others. I tend to see it as more of a range on a spectrum than a different breed of cat.

What you are referring to is avarice. An insatiable desire for money. That would be bad. Seeking to earn wealth to support one's family is not. More people fit the second example than the first.

Ben Rea. It is his money. He can do whatever he wants with it. The more authority the state has over his money the less liberty Ben has. One of the aspects of liberty is the freedom to be a dumbass.

Yes, his money could help many people, charities etc. But it is his money.

Most people do not have $15MM. Most who do have $15MM do not give it to their cat.

There are many Americans who give a great deal to charity be it research, aid to the poor, etc.

http://www.slate.com/id/2243496/ list of American Philanthropists... I listed top 5 2009

Stanley F. and Fiona B. Druckenmiller—$705 million
John M. Templeton—$573 million
William H. (Bill) III and Melinda F. Gates—$350 million
Michael R. Bloomberg: $254 million
Louise Dieterle Nippert—$185 million
It is a charity of Pharisees: they take away one million to show much favour in one hundred dollars. The Russian GAZPROM which robs the future generations on trillions dollars, holds sporting competitions for children. Children will return to poverty then, yet laundered palaces will become dwellings of adored 'tin gods'.
Swindlers will be in clover, until exists simpletons .

Freedom of marasmic grandmother is earned by UNFREE work other people, possibly, talents which are lost for a society / Raskolnikov by F. Dostoyevsky /. Each problem has several sides, and wisdom begins with the multi-polarity of views.
I doubt whether Raskolnikov was more stupid and is less useful to a society than the grandmother. But unipolarity their views led to a fatal end. Both are hostages of the socio-political system.

I not the Russian cop who without ceremony rummages in another's pocket.
It is a question of extremes. Any limitlessness generates a reverse reaction. Meanwhile, in the nature all processes are self-regulated. The society will become truly effective, harmonious and safe when contradictions are will resolve within wise power itself.

It is possible only for collective intelligence of independent participants. Regular disbalance of making is a pathology of the outdated system of monocracy. IT IS HER NATURAL OPERATING MODE.
 
Last edited:
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#15
sans culotte

Or how about just - all power to the soviets, not the party? Remember the workers' soviets and Kronstadt at all? Before they were crushed by the Leninists?


Nicholas Popov

You're talking about a spontaneous activity of the common people. Ordinary people are inert, they turn to politics and power, only when come tough times. And forgets later. This is normal. How to make that hard times for him didn't come?

The permission of inconsistent problems and interests demands special preparation and an mental outlook. This is as much a profession as well as others. It is impossible for a man from the crowd. Stalin used this falsification, when it replaced the old revolutionaries by yes-man / "cooks" for crowd scene. You know the outcome.

The Kronstadt rebellion was caused by the monopoly and privileges of the Bolsheviks in a common predicament. The slogan of the rebels: "We are for the Soviets, but without the Communists!" / Phrase was changed to a more loyal "without political parties" later. The problem consists not in communists or any other Party, but in MONOPOLY of this Party.

Political activity is impossible without organized structures, i.e. political parties.

My idea is the Council (the Soviet) of several parties. I set myself the task of developing a simple and compact circuits control the society, which is free from any ideological preference. In this scheme the right to decisions doesn't belong to any party single-handedly, it uses the spirit of constructive rivalry as well as it depends on public opinion and is opened to renewal.

Leadership is the work for the most intelligent and energetic. We will not go against nature!
 
Nov 10, 2010
10
0
#16
Originally Posted by Budguy68


I am not a slave. People need to work in order to survive. Thats a fact of life.

If I hire someone to wash my car for 6 dollars THAT IS NOT SLAVERY
If I pointed a gun at someone and make him wash my car then YES THAT IS Slavery

you commies are amazing.


Nicholas Popov


The slave works for an slaveholder for soup and a lodging for the night. The slaveholder relaxes on the ranch. IT IS SLAVERY.
Your salary is equal to payment for a food and residing. The owner went to Hawaii. IT IS NOT SLAVERY.
Homo sapiens differs presence of brains: MONEY IS THE TOOL ONLY.

P.S: Either you do constructive work or you fraudulently redistribute money inside a society to a own benefit.
 

Similar Discussions