When asking some people how we go about solving social problems, inequalities or disparities, they say the problem lies in the situation where not enough people are voting. Others contend that it is due to the wrong person(s) being selected or elected for a given governing role... and others claim that a change in the type of government, such as from Democracy to Socialism, or Democracy to "true" Communism, or that we need to be run by a religious authority. Some suggest we need a philosopher King. Others might prefer to return to some heyday of Monarchy, but with controls to offset former monarchial abuses.
In any event, the idea of restructuring a government to represent an Actual definition of itself, regardless if it is a Democracy, Socialism, Communism, etc..., and in particular, how to do go about a restructuring, is not a common topic of discussion. Instead, far too many think that they must live with "the way things are", and to make the best of it... within the rationalizations of their own values of right and wrong. Taking advantage of the disadvantaged, or duping those who live at the same economic social level as us, can become a common practice. Many people create the notion that one or another person is rich, well-off, has money, is not hurting for money, has wealth stashed away, etc... Thus providing not only the rational that someone has money to spare, but that it is alright to secure a portion for themselves, due to some believed parity of effort or hospitality extended to them.
A similarity of logic takes place amongst stock market investors who strive to reap the rewards which may be offered by civil strife, wars, famine, etc... In other words, if they can make money off of another's misery, it is morally alright to do so because they did not create the situation, even if the collective actions of investors played a part by manipulating behavior through investment activity. There are at present no social controls preventing the occurrence of misery due to the actions of those who deliberately create situations in order to capitalize on a stock that is affected by social circumstances. For example, if one or more Generals, politicians, a government agency or associates of theirs has stock in a given commodity that is dependent on whether the social conditions of a given region are stable or not, the ability to conceal their desire to increase their personal wealth by way of one or more stocks could be acquired by fomenting civil strife. An example of this is the actions of someone who starts civil strife in a given part of a city in order to bring down property values so that they can purchase property at a low cost, and then reap the reward of selling the property later on at a higher cost, or keeping the property and sustaining high rent valuations.
Another example would be the use of the C.I.A. or some other country's spy agency to instigate a war to make their resources unavailable for market distribution so that another country's similar resource base would become more valuable. This same tactic occurs for different options such as establishing a need for a given political action. In short, the larger public can be disadvantaged if those creating such situations do so not for the public good, but for a select few... such as was the case when Cheney of the old Bush administration spear-headed circumstances in Iraq so that its former employer Haliburton could reap more millions than those spent on assisting getting Cheney into the White House:
The Pentagon did award a no-bid, or sole-source, contract to a Halliburton subsidiary, Kellogg Brown &Root in March 2003. However, a Congressional report aid the contract was “properly” awarded and that KBR was the “only contractor that was determined to be in a position to provide the services within the required time frame.” The Kerry campaign estimates that the KBR oil reconstruction contract was worth approximately $7 billion, and the Defense Department estimates $8.2 billion. KBR also provides various logistical support in Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries under a competitively awarded contract granted in late 2001. In September 2004, the Pentagon announced it was considering breaking up part of the KBR logistical contract and accepting new bids in an effort to save money. Halliburton would be allowed to re-bid on the contract, but a company official said that it might not do so.
The usage of a limited time frame is a recurringly common practice by government activity as a means of ostracizing, minimizing, isolating, segregating and otherwise eliminating obstacles to ulterior motivated interests. The usage of a time frame limitation is used as a government standard attached with a legal status that is not explicitly given in the Constitution, and should be cause for the people having a right to stop such an abuse for the sake of public interest. It is used as a justification to assist one or more in reaping large rewards at the expense of the public. It is a ploy frequently used by the S.E.C. (Securities and Exchange Commission) in order to enable it to get a larger proportion of funds directed towards itself or some agent thereof.
...And the people have no say so. The larger public is placed at a disadvantage by the present structure of government because it provides a means by which those in governing positions can manipulate rules and regulations to suit personal interests. Defining a given rule so that it favors oneself at the expense of others that should not suffer some loss, is a manipulation that the public should be able to stop. But such power is not typically written into a government's Constitution... a document regularly designed by those who can best advantage themselves without giving the appearance of being greedy or being able to retain power and wield it anyway they want... if a given situation arises— as determined by their ability to provide a definition there of.
Others who benefit from the occurrence and maintenance of social problems are charities. While they may argue that their actions are vitally necessary and that many would suffer more without their efforts, they nonetheless benefit from the continued existence of social problems. Hence, for all those that benefit off of one or another social problem, regardless of the efforts employed to combat them and why an organization or social program was begun; there underlies an incentive not to look for real solutions which may exist outside the conventions of current governing structures. Some will argue it is not their place to look for solutions and that they are simply addressing a social need, but such a philosophy only adds to perpetuating the mindset that social problems are a way of life and one must do the best they can to survive them.
This is the type of thinking that no doubt prevailed during eras when sanitation and community water sources helped to spread disease. The employed "solutions" were to accept a fate meted out by a God, to run from the areas of disease, or to "wait it out" and trust one had the viability to weather the storm of occurrence. However, such "common sense" thinking was later found to be superstitious nonsense with the arrival of sanitation and clean water sources coupled with increased medical knowledge... which was accompanied by alterations in the structure of government. Whereas government action can improve human living conditions, altering the thought of the public with respect to the overall governing formula can do the same. Thus by establishing a Cenocracy with a Cenocratic formula, human living conditions can be improved.
Discussions such as the present one can afford to invest efforts towards a larger philosophical perspective. In as much as some recognize that all political practices are based on some philosophy whether or not the person engaged in such actively acknowledges this, our pursuit of a better government must be more reflective. Yet, not only will we focus on political theory, but all philosophical practices, be they business (economics), government (political) or religious (life/death scenarios).
Our philosophical pursuit will necessarily look for origins such as time, place, and conditions... extending far back into not only the evolutionary past of humanity, but of all organic matter. We may well peer into the recesses of molecular and atomic structure, as well as use a now common-place panoramic visage known as Astronomy, though it was once considered a perspective that only the most intelligent were cognizant of. And to such an end we present to ourselves the general statement that the pressures of our bodily functions influenced by familial pressures acted on by social pressures; create circumstances from which our philosophies evolve. And as an inclusion due to the undertaking of an applied larger knowledge base of dissection, we entertain that such pressures as were mentioned, have been acted upon by the pressures of the Earth that have been subjected to events in the solar system within the activities of the galaxy that exist within the known Universe.
Whereas in a general discussion we are not pressured to be definitive nor provide irrefutable evidence to substantiate such claims, the experiences of our personal lives being subjected to pressures which cause us to react, to respond... whether reflexively or not; provides us with the consideration that the generalization, due to a lack of specificity, nonetheless exerts an inclination towards accepting the view in principle... for the sake of discussion so as not to be held personally accountable by being called an advocate and thus setting ourselves up for derision should some future evidence prove the generalizations to be less than what is being suggested as a probability instead of just a plausibility.
For the philosophically minded, such semantic meanderings are a fun and sometimes useful tool to provide considerations that may not have occurred otherwise. Whereby, we come to further suggest that all philosophies might well dramatically change or become obsolete if humanity were to leave the planet Earth. Hence, all our philosophies are "Earth born" constructs bordering on artificiality... when looked upon from a larger Universe perspective. They are survival mechanisms for a given situation, even if the situation lingers for centuries since the pressures of the Earth and beyond its realm, play out on a different time scale; just as do the life cycles of plants, insects and other life forms. And even though some would swear that their belief is eternal and the ultimate truth, and that such an adamant position does not readily give up its origin of developmental composition; it nonetheless remains a falsehood for others... even if they had been subjected to the same set of overall pressures.
Be it for genetic, nutritional or whatever reasons, many people might not come to accept a certain belief as being factual. And though others contend that they believe just so they can participate in a socialized formula thereof which may be attended with social ceremony, if given some other social convention... such people would follow the dictates of those ascribed to with authority. For they are followers who might well adopt a perspective simply because it provides a paycheck. If another philosophy provides a larger paycheck, that is if does not strain someone's parroting sensibilities; they would follow it instead. Presumed leaders are the same. They too can be persuaded to change, if the changes promote a greater role for them to participate in... with the word "greater" individually defined.
For a political philosophy such as a Cenocracy with a Cenocratic formula to both survive and prosper, it must be shown to exhibit qualities that are desirable to many different walks of life. It can not be viewed as an invasive plant or insect infestation. It must be seen, smelled, heard and felt to be useful to better the lives of many different interests in their given circumstances... like a sustainable breath of fresh air that does not cover up the many pollutants of present governing practices, but actually dissipates them... even though there are some who like to smell their own stench and this is why they linger in a toilet instead of flushing it while in use... and they are not even aware of their own wallowing activities.
Some people have learned to like the smell of one or another pollutant. Yet the sense of smell is not the only organ used when adapting to some pollutant that becomes used as a day to day marker of one's presence in order to suggest a greater meaning and purpose to one's life... regardless of how detrimental such may be to others. For example, some people avoid flowers that are associated with bees whose venomous sting can cause severe allergic reactions in some. It's not that they dislike flowers or do not realize the important role that bees play, they must nonetheless live their life with a degree of apprehension... if not a readily available source of medication to counteract the effects should the possibility of being stung arise.
And no matter how universally applicable a philosophy may be, large populations may not practice it... and instead perpetuate a belief they were brought up in. In such instances, only a catastrophic occurrence might influence the adoption of a new belief... particularly if it is encoded with a language born in a culture that practices a perspective due to an environmental condition not typically experienced by others. If it is not translatable to the belief systems of many cultures, its impact may be short-lived as a universal applicant... though it may survive as a regional interest. For a belief system to be sustainable, it must convey a very great body of meaning in a single symbol, word, or by way of a gesture. Such words as hope, peace, love, life, death and god are examples. But so are Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Islam... though others could be mentioned. Such words as Communism, Democracy, and Socialism are household expressions amongst some communities, even if the speakers of such have but a minimal grasp and can't provide an appreciable articulation thereof. Naivete' does not matter, and may at sometimes be advantageous because it may opportune one to inculcate further understanding later on.
Likewise, the word Cenocracy will become recognized and developed beyond these present early discussions of formulization because it embodies multiple beliefs such as the aforementioned Communism, Democracy and Socialism. Like the Magna Carta before it, and though it was followed by authoritative treachery, the idea of a Cenocracy with a Cenocratic formula will be pursued by the people in order to express a Declaration For Greater Independence. Communism, Democracy and Socialism fall short because they are fragments of a larger philosophy to be embodied to help humanity fulfill its greater potentials that are held in check by those in authority who seek to reach personal goals by way of utilizing present governing structures as tools they become familiar and adept with; and have an underlying structure that harasses the public through present conventions of legislation so that it is embroiled in various distractions which keep it from pursuing a larger collective goal for all to share in.
We The People need a Cenocracy... a New Government. It is indeed shameful that we in the present era can not reach a civil accord with governing authority to have a collective redress of ALL our grievances because no actual, realistic method for such exists; which would further entitle ALL OF Us to vote on all the issues we want to... as an active part of a true (Of, By, For All the people) democratic political process— without being subjected to intendedly dismissive time-constrained Initiative and Referendum nonsense instead of some Constitutionally ingrained formula as a dedicated Right as the collective Will of the People so determine. But because the people are subjected to so much nonsense, it is of need for us to Demand a Cenocracy. And Demand it we do. We will have our Cenocracy, one way or another.