Cenocracy means "New Rule", translated into New Government. Just like Democracy means "People Rule" that is translated into People Government or alternatively as a Government by the People. By adding the prefix "Ceno" (meaning New or Recent, as in Cenozoic), we coin the word Cenodemocracy, meaning a New Peoples Government or a new Democracy.
A growing interest in a developing Cenocracy is presenting Democracy with an unexpected form of Competition... Indeed, adherents for adopting a Cenocracy view the circumstance as producing great social fun. Since there is nothing wrong with the prospects for the development of a healthy competition.
The need for a healthy competition is widely understood, but is not achieved by the current process of government. Whereas both the people and government authority recognizes their are shortcomings with the current governing system, no one is publicly offering alternative processes which not only guarantee, but increase the present standards of Equality. While the American government is promoted as being one in which the idea of "Checks and Balances" is a unique provision which ensures equality, it is an equality meant specifically for those directly involved with the legislative processes. It preeminently excludes the whole of the public from participating in this equality. Like days of old when certain segments of society were excluded from sharing equally in having the right to vote, the public of today is being ostracized as being unworthy. The public is expressly forbidden to equally share in the Checks and Balances Legislative provision. Because it is the public's government too, the people should have an equal right, an equal say so, an equal ability to determine how the government should function. Indeed, as a corollary to this obscene expression of inequality, preventing all students from an ability to vote on social issues and for officials of their choice, when many students have the intellectual wherewithal to make better choices than some adults granted the right to vote based merely on citizenship, age and a registration fulfillment, is yet another expressed embarrassment of a low Democratic standard that must be addressed with a higher ideal.
Students or those who have not reached the regular age of voting, since many teenagers live on their own, and desire to vote, should be permitted to take an exam set up to distinguish the level of competency needed to vote... which undoubtedly will be very low because the voting competency of many so-called adults can be identified as exhibiting a low score for understanding social issues and what a candidate actually represents, despite all their campaign rhetoric and other nonsense.
Many people already believe in the need of a Cenocracy, they just don't have a suitable name or label for their belief. And these "many" people, believe it or not, are politicians. The attempts to draft a bill that may be legislated into a law by which the people might benefit with an expressed greater equality, stand as a testament to the sincerity by which many politicians are engaged in their efforts to assist the public in ways that a predecessor may not have had such as:
Most people don't keep track of what their legislators are doing. They may not be aware of a particular bill being drafted or introduced into the legislative process... unless an everyday "public-person" is consciously aware of a particular bill and how it may directly affect them. In short, because the public is not directly involved with the legislative processes, most "public-people" remain rather naive unless a particular issue is fomented into a protest by a group of citizens or is instigated into the foreground of public attention by some media source. Indeed, the public is socially schooled to be aware about the occurrence of Legislative processes and how it takes place, but are also instructed it otherwise is none of its business in the sense of personal participation. Like other industries, the government is designed to make the public an investor, a consumer, a spectator... but little else except to expect the brunt of the burden when things go wrong and an uneven redistributed share of gains that are disproportioned before a proportioned equality is even considered.
But the quantity of problems and the existence of serious social issues affecting everyone are not being adequately addressed by the current structure of government, no matter how it processes are historically sentimentalized or claimed as a gift from God, and therefore cannot be transgressed or dishonored... even though the usage of an amendment provision indicates it is flexibly receptive to improvement. Yet, improvement within the framework established by those in the past can only proceed so far. It has become quite clear that there is need of a new framework. An analogy that may be used is to describe Democracy as a lean-to, a mud hut, a tepee or adobe dwelling... to give but a few examples of old structures. And despite the arguments for pointing out in-context advantages, such illustrations must also describe them as representing particularlized ways of life. Such ways of living do not now exist, no matter how some may want to claim such life styles as being better... because of all the social problems we have, or are thought to have. Such earlier structures were for a time and place accompanied with frames of mind in small populations. An increasing population comes with increasing social issues which requires the adoption of new structures... to live in, around, and with.
Many people yearn for a return to a simpler way of life without the presence of so many social problems, not realizing that such an assumption does not fully realize how disadvantaged many people were during earlier periods. For example, there was a lack of adequate medicine, medical treatment and even electricity. Items for which many people today remain without, either due to availability or cost. The availability of affordable food, clean water, and clothing are recurring issues which existed in the past and remains with us in the present... though many people today have multiple clothing items, for which they seldom or if ever wear after an initial trial. And let us not forget about a person's rights, such as those who fought for a Woman's Right to Vote, or another's right to be free from slavery. In short, the assumed "Good Old Days" are not so good as we might ascertain by a closer look. Benefits such as a lower crime rate that may be gained by a return to a past era in which there was a reduced population must be seen in the correct perspective of proportion. In other words, a lower population has a lower crime rate, and an increased population has an increased crime rate. Adopting a mentality in which the population is purposely reduced, no matter what method is employed either legally or illegally, is a refusal to examine current social governing processes in order to develop a new structure.
Social problems would still exist if we were to return to a "simpler way of life", just on a lower scale... that is, after a period of wide-spread destruction and death that would ensue if we of the present decided to forego the usage of all modern technologies. Many people would die without modern medicine and surgical techniques. The ability to keep foods for long periods of time would be greatly diminished because we would forego the usage of refrigeration. And for those who might suggest that some, but not all technologies should be set aside, which ones? Clearly it is not the technologies themselves, but how they are used by humans. Yet if we suggest making a "better" human through genetics, we have to decide on what is meant by "better" or if humanity should tamper with the presumed God-given design; since an alteration might suggest to some that we are no longer an image thereof.
The development of a law that may benefit society is sometimes stalled not because there would not be support for it, but because it simply isn't thought of because the creation of an idea is very often constrained within the framework of application. Metaphorically speaking, you can't put an elevator in a single floor dwelling. It not only is impractical, but is not something that would necessarily even come to mind. The structure of a dwelling can encourage creative ideas for rennovation, enslave old ideas into being labeled a tradition or valuable antique, or cause the construction of new ideas to remain as an architectural draft. Legislators do not have all the answers, and even if someone did have, the other legislators might not support them because they want all answers to conform to the structure we call Democracy. The answers for social problems in a resource limited nation, for a resource limited planet with an increasing population, can be more adequately addressed by altering the various social governance dwellings we have constructed. The present governing processes are like adding more rooms in a given space for a growing population that needs a structure to lessen the problems associated with a situation of over-crowding, but physical and mental variations. Present forms of government are much too restrictive.
If one thinks that to answer the problem of an increasing population is to get the population to act in the assumed harmony portrayed in an insect colony, to make everyone the same, so to speak, the difficulty lays in the existence of Independent Thought. Cloning of humans will not create a "perfect", insect-like harmonious colony unless the brain is subjected to an alteration, through genetics or chemistry. While some independent thought is transformed into dependent thought which can lead to a mimicry of ideas and actions; humans retain a capacity for creative, innovative, and original thinking... as well as action. In order to maintain present Democratic practices, laws will have to be fashioned in terms of decreasing collective freedom. Present Democratic practices will have to become more restrictive, like a shoe-horning method of getting a certain quantity into a given space. Present Democratic practices are too confining to accommodate the needs of a growing population... growth in the aging, growth in crime, growth in medical needs, growth in food, growth in energy needs, growth in employment needs, growth in education, growth in self-identity, etc., etc., etc...
The attempt by legislators to use present Democratic processes in addressing social issues is to use a quantitative approach viewed in terms of a defined qualitative one. A larger government frequently is the result. While this in itself is not bad, it can only be compounded by more of the same actions because such acts give the appearance of solving a problem determine in mere quantitative and not qualitative terms. In fact, a larger government is interpreted to be equated with an increased measure of equality, when the too approaches are decidedly different though they are interconnected. However, if a problem were truly solved, the need for a particular answer would not longer be viable. For example, the cessation of a disease from occurrence obviates the need for continuing a vaccine, unless the usage of a vaccine is aligned with the character or greed whose ulterior motive is to use whatever unscrupulous deed it can to insist that a need remains... even if it requires deliberately infecting one or more people to "prove" there is a need... so they can make more money. In order for a government to persist, it needs to appear as being viable. Such viability can be real or manufactured. The problem is not singular in that you can only put so many clothes in a given suitcase, but that a particular type of suitcase (clothes-case/personal items-case) can only be so large... and likewise, the means to house or transport it. Limitations are quite real, but in resources and a means of accommodation. Something must give... not only as a point of the present expression but with respect to the overall governing processes as well.
Adding more suitcases to fit more items is like adding more government agencies or agents thereto as a solution... a solution within a given context perpetrated by a given social structure. While at a given moment it may seem rational and logical to do so, limitations and problems, some of which come by way of an adopted strategy to answer a problem, are eventually recognized. Dividing up a passenger list into those who can and can not have more than a single suitcase, is the rationale of practicing inequality. It is the standard by which many people resort to when attempting to answer a problem. Instead of seeking a greater expression of equality, it formulates, rules, regulations, laws, processes and procedures, etc., which restricts equality to unequal definitions presenting a dichotomy such as rich/poor, employed/unemployed, etc...
While the usage of a dictatorship or monarchy can solve problems by way of an enforced acceptance to inequality based on one reason or another; a Democracy that strives for assuring a higher standard of equality can not do so as easily, unless it promotes circumstances which provide some reasonable means for accepting a lesser formula of equality. Such circumstances frequently are contrived by way of various forms of manipulation. In order for a Democracy to prosper in a growing population, it must provide for the growth of a greater standard and expression of equality. Perpetrated illusions will eventually be seen for what they are... as falsehoods and fairy tales... and fatalistic. The level of equality presently being practiced is the limit by which today's standards of Democracy can operate. A higher standard of our personally-individualized and publicly-collective equality can only be achieved if the overall design of the suitcase is redesigned to accommodate such a wardrobe. It is not a fashionable fad, but the development of a consciousness as unadulterated as one's nakedness... the very wardrobe with which we all enter into this world... and must enter into a new age of humanity with.
A Cenocracy challenges Democracy, (and all other alternative forms of social governance), to prove that it is better than a governing process that is actually Of, By, and For the people, and not just claim it is by way of illusions, deceptions, and enforced myopia.