Social issues are generally addressed with what amount to as primitive word problems being supplied to a group of well-intentioned wise men (and women) who gather together in a tower of babel. Like the blind men attempting to describe a different part of an elephant that all have an appreciable unfamiliarity with, social problems are being confronted by those who use the same words to describe different things, different numbers to represent similar generalities, and varying mathematical symbols applied to the same problem in different ways. Needless to say, that word substitutions, the usage of additional symbols such as in basic mathematics as well as differing applications of operational ordering can alter not only the result, but the initial formulaic expression. In short, while we all realize we need to achieve a consensus, many don't apply this same level of realization and determination for the need to apply a means at achieving a consensus. A Cenocracy will, eventually, enable this to come about.
As simplistic as the present rendering is, it is not meant to invite a similitude of predisposed expectation when addressing social issues. There are many variables to consider in our equations that are made unnecessarily more complicated by the addition of superfluous characterizations which may take on one or multiple forms. Such attenuates of design are deliberately thrown into considerations by those who deliberately want all problems to be solved by a single formulaic instance. Problem solving efforts are thus systematically made more confusing and distorted into abstractions by a personalized philosophy of "what ifs" suppositioning. By so doing they seek to make themselves appear to be the more intelligent, more wise with a greater foresight by introducing very many philosophical imponderables for no other purpose but to hinder any and all preliminary steps.
Such people want nothing less and nothing more to do than argue... which serves them well for concealing a cowardice towards personal action which, when others are convinced to do likewise, is meant as an indication that they are right. By so doing, they think to impress themselves and others with having a long range vision by pointing out possible pitfalls, obstacles and impasses, yet are unable to see their presumed long range vision as a short range perspective to begin any effort which would enable them to realize Cenocracy is a viable detour around, over, through any and all their fears for going forward.
With respect to a Revolution, the initial formula must be quite simplistic so that everyone understands the simplistic equation in addressing simple problems; hence, the need for 3 easily understood stepping stones. Once these fundamentals are understood, just like in elementary school, then we can move on to more complex problems requiring a joint effort at solving them instead of present social structural formulas displaying some Neanderthal-styled entrails reading sooth sayer.
Needless to say, some people are fast learners... sometimes referred to as a quick study. The faster we can all learn the basics, the sooner we will be moving collectively, into the domains of socially designed algebraic and geometrical formulas. As such, it might be said that present problems are the result of not only the incorrect math formula being applied but the same answers being achieved... but present government structures are not presenting their work in order for the rest of us to pin-point if the wrong problem is being addressed in the first place, where the deductive error occurred in the calculation, or if the correct answer was appropriately applied. Governments are trying to tackle complex social problems by using outdated formulas of computation and keep the whole process in their head.
Governing authority figures are like kids in a math class who won't show how they arrived at an answer because they don't want mistakes pointed out due to their experience with a long standing parental (fore-father/mother) figure who abuses them when they do make a mistake. A history of practiced concealment assists the parental figures in disguising a low self-esteem that wants their child to exhibit a greatness that they want to take credit for as an extension of themselves instead of being presented with a mirror-image of an imperfect person when the child openly displays a mistake... even though many of us know the child is still learning and has a right to make mistakes.
The child (either, in separate contexts: a society's citizenry or governing officials) are thus, in the present example, brought up to publicly exhibit a superficiality of exaggerated superiority that all others sharing a similar form of low self-esteem want to use as a desired image of themselves,... like so many who use the actions of a sports team or presumed doctrine of a religious figure: as a reflection of what they would like to be seen as harboring— a greatness, a "chosen one" especiality (such as those singularly elected to or selected for a given office/position).
The lower a society's self esteem is, the greater (and more desperate) might well be its efforts at seeking some status of superiority... real or imagined, freely interpreted as such or forced upon others to accept as a reality (through trade, war, bribery, threat, sanction, charity, etc...). Quite often, what they say and do are at opposite poles of actuality. Such abusive "parental figures" (to be found in some traditions, fore-father/mother views, government designs, etc.), prefer to indulge in the usage of illusions and delusions, and want everyone else to agree with their adulterated visions of supremacy.
This illusion of supremacy is exhibited in their unwillingness to show the process by which they calculate a problem because they don't want to show a possible mistake since it is easier to conceal when no one sees anything. Their unwillingness is thus projected as a right to defiance meant to be interpreted as strength of character instead of the insecurity for which it really is. But if they just happen to produce some simulation of an answer for a given problem; the lack of visible formula is suggested to mean it it represents some sort of unique talent, giftedness or even genius.
Clearly, governments need to explain a problem as they see it (because their perception might well be wrong), display what formula they want to use for addressing the issue, and show us the computation so we can all address mistakes before they are tested.
There are a lot of people with ideas of what needs to be changed in the government, but for the most part, even with a very large public reading thereof, changes are not taking place. The present structure of government is too inadequate to address a very deep need of the public to effect changes, collectively, on its own behalf. We need a Cenocracy because reality differs significantly from what present governing systems purport it to be. For example, a Cenocracy will highlight and address the purported watchdog community existing at every government level:
All government activities and personnel will be placed under the scrutiny of the people which will not be a single watch dog, but a populace-wide pack of watch dogs that can do more than just bark (or whistle blow) as is currently practiced by way of letters, phone calls, e-mails, dead-ended petitions, journalistic assistance, etc...
A Cenocracy puts into lawful practice a means by which the people can effect accountability of all governing processes and all government employees; those whom are elected and those hired either part-time, full-time, or temporarily and by any other method, contractual, second-hand, under-the-table, or otherwise.
A Cenocracy can insure term limits and limits in government employment duration as well as preventing such activities as "double and triple dipping...etc." of funds, contracts, employment, etc...
A Cenocracy can insure that those selected for a given position are subject to dismissal if their performance suffers a prolonged disintegration which can not be addressed adequately by current interventionist standards, with efforts of exception duly noted and exercised if conditions warrant such attempts.
A Cenocracy can ensure that those elected to a given position will not fail to effect campaign promises and that their given period of electedness will be given a periodic performance review to insure adequacy of ability (since circumstances may change requiring someone else with a particular talent); or the job is found to be decidedly more difficult than expected, or personal issues render a person's efforts into becoming overwhelmed or even an extreme mutedness of capability. This also reserves the peoples right to place a given employee into another position, even in the same context, that may be provided with a steady income since circumstances out of the person's control may have arisen.
A Cenocracy can effect a desperately needed redesign in the Constitution so that, for example, Representatives need not maintain two residences (one in their State and one in Washington) which is sometimes used as an excuse to vote themselves in a raise without the assent of the public. Just because a person has a residence, or even a business venture in a given State or Country, does not necessarily mean they have any deep affection for the people; a comment which might be accentuated by the notion of foreign investors who live in their own countries. However, a person can Represent the best interests of a State (or Country) and not have an actual residence there... as many a diplomat has exercised and the United Nations exhibits with joint action. If we are to compare Residence with affection, and affection with love, experience gives us practice with the realization that love can often be fickle. Words of love are a far cry from the practicalities needed to sustain a relationship. This is why a Representative whose love for their constituents is deeper than the words of their campaign poetry, supports it with definitive action.
A Cenocracy can insure that the public has the right and legal means to replace someone who is or might be more adept at tackling a given task under certain unexpected circumstances since social conditions are dynamic and not static. A Cenocracy will prevent any and all government employees and departments from giving themselves increases in wages, funds or working capital, without the approval of the public via a referendum as a larger expression of a "checks and balances" system; the present one of which being practiced by the U.S. government is wholly deficient.
Indeed, while on the one hand the present governing structures attempt to work fair-handedly to discourage the dispatching of whimsical, superficial and subjective policies; these same safe-guards become so embedded with routines they take on an embodied traditionalism which acts as a moat, drawbridge and high walls topped with intersecting ivory spires manned with illusions of cloud-filled grandeuring Constitutions for which no one can even fly a kite over in seeking greener pastures. We are simply led to believe no such greener grass exists other than that which we are illusioned to see... but we are given the freedom to dream anyway, so long as it doesn't get in the way of the contrived realities of present governing structures.
Revolutions are attempts by the people to scale the walls of governing processes when those processes are either felt to be unduly unjust, or restrictive of freedoms. Yet this is not to say that everyone can acknowledge the existence of an injustice or restriction to freedom. Typically, they are recognized by a single person who begins pointing out such to others, who may, in turn, do likewise. But, if some dire circumstance doesn't force the larger populace to seek a reconciliation of differences of perspective, one or more individuals may be left with the task of changing circumstances through applications of creative ideas which provide a representative model that piques the curiosity of someone who will act as a patron of a proposed change in ideas... that may sooner or later be called either a Movement or Revolution.
As such, let us be forthright by saying our views posit an untried hypothesis, like so many laws, military campaigns, experiments, recipes, etc., that have been carried out via an exploratory effort fashioned by educated guesswork, life experiences, and even luck as well as serendipity. With this said, let us begin by saying that the people need an effective forum for addressing concerns and making lawful changes to laws and the structure of the government as the public deems it necessary to do so. The structure of the government needs to be changed. Not with words, not with committees, not with juggling departments or personnel, not with memorandums, not with buying off journalists who will redefine the same nonsense in a positive light, not by offering positions to those voicing grievances, not by simply replacing one person with another who will perpetuate the same "business as usual" model of Representation, not by a face-lift of the old structure, etc., but by the adoption of a real, honest, new architecture designed by the people through a National Referendum.
Such is Cenocracy: A call for all peoples to begin thinking in terms of new Constitutions for their respective Nation and a singular International Constitution which far exceeds the contemplations of the United Nations Charter. Humanity must exercise considerably more intelligence, foresight and wisdom than it has ever done before.
Such is Cenocracy: A wedge to be placed in between the mortar and bricks of old enabling the dam of traditions to burst which will permit the waters of a new age to gush forth. In as much as this sounds to be counter-intuitive to present rationality, it is the very nurturance humanity needs. So get out your canoes, your rafts, your inner-tubes, your sail-boats and your surf-boards. It's time for humanity to take a ride.
Such is Cenocracy: A means of throwing timid people into the flow of a new life giving water (with life vests), who rush away from ensuing waves like the timid primates of antiquity that had imagined all kinds of possible evils lurking in the wavering grasses of the Savannah prior to its evolution of walking upright.
Yep, the notion that the people should have their own collective National (if not International) Government partyA+, Constitutionally mandated Cenocratic form of Referendum, and a Peoples Legislative Branch on the National and Local (if not International) levels, may seem to be a crazy idea. Just like the usage of fire, the wheel, television, radio, airplanes, submarines, etc., not to mention the wearing of footwear or clothes. So before we of the Cenocratic Revolution make a march on Congress (or Parliament) and throw marshmallows at them for their cowardice against leading the way to a Cenocratic Reform, we ask that you take the idea for a ride around the block, kick the tires, and don't let the performance scare you. (Many businesses, governments and religions give the impression of being run by those whose mentality is in the push cart, horse and buggy, or paddle boat level of performance, despite the usage of modern machinery, electronics, and philosophy. Such is similar to the placement of a pencil in the hand of a Neanderthal.)
No doubt a lot of discoveries exist but they are buried in some cubby-hole of a patent office, desk drawer, shoebox, journal, wallet, purse, or even stuffed inside the glovebox of some vehicle in a salvage yard, which may never reach the light of day until they are "re-discovered" later on. As such, Cenocracy is not a new idea. It is a very old idea about having a society governed by the people. But only the country of Switzerland comes close to practicing it... albeit on a very small scale.
Christopher Columbus, Leonardo Da Vinci, Einstein and hundreds, if not thousands of others have met with nay-sayers when they came to make a public proposal for a new idea that may at first be reacted to as if a dog was barking at them and they had to fashion some type of intellectually defensive fence around in terms of various reasons to reject the idea, because it was not only unconventional, but unconventionally very strange. Generally, the public doesn't pay any attention or may scoff at a new idea as if it were an absurdity because they simplistically associate it with that which is more familiar and characteristically amusing aligned with other more typical mental meanderings analogous to firefly catching, or butterfly chasing... if not mosquito or fly swatting. Yet, if an idea doesn't show itself, regardless of the differing metaphors used in relaying the same message, it can never gain any ground towards becoming accepted... with or without adjustments, such as the following portraiture of Cenocracy:
Present societies, due to the ineffectualities of present governing structures, are like tightly wound balls of string that have various knots in them which causes the overall surface to exhibit "perturbations" of disturbance (let us call them "knots") which can not be dealt with simply by attempting to wind the string in another direction around the same foundation, though various laws and policies would give such an advocating pretense.
And while some would label themselves and their respective peoples as being hearty, strong, tough, or some other such reference suggesting an uncompromising quality of virtuous fortitude that would meet death with a dagger between its teeth and a glint in its eye:
Current governing efforts at addressing perceived "problems" may only fore-stall the eventuality of larger social "protuberances" emerging from compounded smaller ones, that a future generation may try to solve the reason(s) for by racking its brain in wanting to decipher the cause; and which, we might add, was the initial impetus for developing a science concerned with the functions of society.
This "Sociology" (study of society) and its attendant 'Sociologists' were, in the beginning, supremely sincere and hopeful that a scientific approach (particularly from the time of Auguste Comte's impetus of using a "Scientific Sociology") as the means by which humanity could unravel the source or sources of social problems; and that we of today might refer to as a "source-code", given our penchant for "borrowing" terms used in other research fields. But as time wore on, and the answers to social problems remained stubbornly elusive and were compounded by disagreements amongst the Sociologist community; Sociology has surrendered its premier edict of solving social problems to a philosophically-based textbook preface of simply studying (and classifying) society... with the younger generations of Sociologists quite comfortable with this arrangement; given the fact there is no further burdening pressure to resolve large social problems... even though some may enter the field with a genuine desire to follow the sentiment of C.W. Mills: "Scociologists should not be passive observers but active agents of social change". It is a statement we Cenocrats can identify whole heartedly with.
There have been different schools of political and sociological thought (philosophy) ranging through the vagaries of:
And despite an approach which claims to practice a governing policy which separates church and state, it has been found impossible to do so because we humans are all three... or at least one or two of the three plays a dominant role. It has proved to be impossible to dictate, legislate, or give a person's "democratic free will" the controlling agency of separating one from the others. While we may not claim some god commands authority to legislate an appropriate type of society, thoughts of one's religion often play a dominant role in their political decisions. Others are dominated by economic concerns. And still others attempt to encourage a more altruistic approach so that we might all live (and grow) in harmony together (with the latter being most often described by some sort of metaphysic)... even if the majority don't actively think this way.
By themselves, each of these three are a minority. Like the betting game using the hands to circumscribe representations of a rock, pair of scissors, and piece of paper. Where the rock can break the scissors, the scissors can cut the paper, and the paper can cover the rock. The three are antagonistic to one another, each with their respective abilities; causing an endless historical cyclicity which can be depicted by the image to the right. It sums up the state of affairs in human society throughout the world. Some are on the daily treadmill, others are sitting back watching the world go by, some are aggressive, others assertive, some play the run, catch me and follow-the-leader games learned in childhood, some fall down but pick themselves up, and some are even shown falling through the cracks.
If any one of them should falter, then one of the other two will come to dominate, though there have been instances where two of the three have worked against the third to enforce their will. Businesses, governments and religions have alternatively exercised usage of all three implements, with varying end results. While the means of improving the situation is more easily done in a smaller or isolated setting, it is much more difficult when one country must now interact with multiple countries, each utilizing the three implements in various ways and degrees. Nonetheless, a global restructuring can take place.
Note: Instead of a Cenocratic "Political" Party as was previously documented, it is thought to be more appropriate to originate this as the "Cenocratic Government Party" since its intended organization has nothing to do with the traditionally used formula of collectively endorsing and supporting a particular candidate within the scope of a designated political party. It is specifically for the support and endorsement of the Cenocratic governing process as a primacy of accountable existence. Individual members can support and endorse any candidate they wish. It supersedes the notion of an "Independent" party. [return]