NewPoliticalSystem  Index  Home  New  Links Groups  

Corruption

The dictionary definition is:- make rotten; pervert, make evil; bribe. It says it all, yet does not say enough, what allowance is made for a select few making/influencing decisions that affect everyone without reference to the individuals who will have the result imposed on them. I'm in the UK, and I've been looking at democracy, or more correctly, the lack of it, for several years.

Various options are available to give the people democracy, most overlook the factors of :-

1. why we do not have it in the first place,

2. what it is,

3. who, or what, is keeping democracy from happening, or

4. how to achieve it.

     First what is meant by democracy? Generally accepted options are:-

1. delegating your vote to someone else.

2. retaining your vote.

The first is the version used by countries not under dictatorship, the second is what should happen, but does not, except in a few isolated cases where referendums are held, even there the Representatives retain the voting power on the majority of issues. 

 So who is stopping true democracy?

    1:- Politicians? they don't help because they are too busy in too many directions, and are kept in line by the party political machine. It must be said that I have a certain amount of sympathy for the honest politicians, they are caught between the devil and a hard place, if they want information they go to the civil servants to get it, if they pass a law/regulation the civil servants are the ones who implement it. 

     2:- Civil Servants? Again, they don't help because they follow the agenda set by the senior bureaucrats which steers a path between the major parties to benefit their own agenda (have you noticed how the number of civil servants increases year on year, even when they privatise public services? i.e. they get rid of the manual workers and get more 'pen-pushers' to write yet more regulations). Most, if not all, 'solutions' look to control the politicians, which in reality are the least of the problem, it's just that they are the most visible.

To clarify one point, the 'government' is the bureaucrats, not the leading party, the politicians are not there long enough, or strong enough, to tackle all the problems of running a country, they are only there to draw attention away from what's really going on i.e. divide and conquer.

 Who else is involved?

    3:- Bankers
One saying that has stuck with me is 'Give me control of a countries money, and I care not who makes the laws', the man who said that (250 years ago) founded one of the worlds powerful banking families. The logic of that saying is still true today (although it does not mean that they have not evolved in that time).

     4:- The media (TV, Radio, Newspaper, Internet, etc. and you can include advertising in this category).
It does not take much looking to realise that the media is owned by a few very powerful international companies, and they also have an agenda.

     5:- Multinational Companies
Some of these are so big that their financial dealings put them above most countries in turnover, coupled with the power that gives is the ability to get negative tax bills i.e. they can obtain more grants etc than they pay in tax. They can get the political machine, and most of the public, rolling over and wagging their tails to get the company moving into their high unemployment area, paying for the factory to be built, tax allowances etc. If things get a bit tight, they can always threaten to move else where.

     6:- Last of all, The public.
There is a mind set amongst a lot of people of 'they know best' i.e. the assumption that the ones elected are in a better position to judge what is best for the public. Coupled with that is the fact that most people are too concerned with trying to make ends meet without getting involved with politics, also without realising that politics is one of the reasons that the 'ends' don't meet i.e. tax till they drop.

 Each one is a contributory factor, each has an influence on the others. So:-

A:- Which needs controlling the most?
My money goes on the Civil Servants,

1. they control the politicians

2. they can trip up an over-ambitious politician any day of the week,

3. they are there when the politico's are on holiday,

4. they can implement (rubber-stamp) directives the politicians never see,

5. there are more of them,

6. they are unelected,

7. no one controls them,

8. they need money for everything,

9. and they know how to get it. YOU.

10. the write the laws and regulations.

 If one looks at the New Order, you'll find that it is run by the Civil Servants, they carry a few politicians along just to keep the public occupied (if they bother to look). A country is run by the civil servants, they out number politicians 1000 to 1, the EU goes even further, the UN has 100%, the politicians are invited guests (the ambassadors are civil servants).

     B:- controlled by who?

Obviously it has to be the public, they have to pay the bill, but that would require a structure of some sort.

     C:- and how?

1:- Protests only increase the power of what is being fought, and paves the way for yet more control.

2:- Increase public awareness of what's going on?
I'm on numerous groups that are doing/trying to do that, yet it only increases the information overload of the ones who are on those groups, what about everyone else? again it needs some sort of structure to disseminate the information to the general public in a form that is acceptable to the public i.e. giving both sides in an unbiased way (difficult, but should not be impossible).

    3:- Use the law against them? who/what is the law? the judges are civil servants, the law is what is written by passed trials, yet find a judge that will accept a constitutional case, and if you did the answer would be foregone conclusion i.e. defence of the status quo.

    4:- Get them to publish on the internet? they do that now in most cases and you try and find it, and what do you do if you do find it?

For every set of rules they publish a booklet on how to protest about it, just try it and see what happens,

1. they have a structure, you don't,
2. they have the means, you don't.
3. they have the time, you don't.
4. they have the man-power (and access to plenty more), you don't,
5. they have the money (yours), you only have yours, and you need that to pay the taxes to keep them.

 5:- Internet voting?

1. what would the cost be of giving everyone access?
2. how many would trust it,?
3. who would run it?
4. how would/could the results be checked?
5. how/who would check what the civil servants did with the result?

 So how does one get a structure with sufficient manpower to even start looking?

My suggestion is New Political System, it's due for a re-write owning to the fact I've been through the evolution of 'who/how/why is the problem', from politicians to 'vested interests' to civil servants, but the structure will remain because I think it's fundamentally correct for any of the causes.

One other 'small' point, within any organisation there are the lower orders that follow the orders, they also belong in a community, they do not necessarily agree with what is happening because they also have to pay the 'bill' (taxes and commodity prices) at the end of it, yet with the right structure in place they would/could be useful sources of local, and national information.

I've spoken to several people who are on/in non-governmental-organisations (NGO's), they also question where the money is coming from, and why, yet they also have to fight for their organisations slice-of-the-cake (budget). None of them have any means of controlling the situation, they can only react to it.

We need a universal structure in order to have any chance of controlling/stabilising the out-of-control spiral we are locked into.

The 2001 Corruption Perceptions Index

For more details regarding the table go to  http://www.transparency.org/documents/cpi/2001/cpi2001.html#cpi