More actions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The ratings system, implemented over a community, suggests [direct democracy] as a natural form of government to complement it. The ratings system is itself a form of voting so it is easy to see how it can be adapted to work as a form of governance. In a sense, it is a form of ["open source" decision making]. Clearly a direct democracy imposes a burden on its citizens to participate in detailed policy decisions, a cognitive load which may well prove to be too much. Needless to say, with a direct democracy, citizens will have the ability to change their method of governance (say to a representative democracy). But many methods to lessen the cognitive load through technology will also exist. |
|||
<math> |
|||
A = {{W_1 \sum R_1} + {W_2 \sum R_2} + {W_3 \sum R_3} + ... \over {W_1 \sum N_1} + {W_2 \sum N_2} + {W_3 \sum N_3} + ...} |
|||
</math> |
|||
In some ways, these methods will lead to [technocracy], a form of government where experts formulate policy for the common good. This is probably inevitable given the complexity of some issues and since the ratings system will be good at selecting those who are best able to work in given policy domains. If citizens assign their ratings weight to them, they will effectively have the power to make policy for the community. But technocracy also implies tools we give ordinary people to increase their participation in government. |
|||
[[File:Image001.png|thumb|center]]a=b |
|||
We might note that any political system will hopefully be subject to a [political philosophy] that places our basic liberties as individuals vis a vis society as the highest goal. The philosophy of [John Rawls] seems to come closest to achieving this. |
|||
c=d |
|||
<code lang="python"> |
|||
i = 10 |
|||
y = 20 |
|||
b = i + y |
|||
</code> |
|||
Revision as of 19:05, 27 August 2024
The ratings system, implemented over a community, suggests [direct democracy] as a natural form of government to complement it. The ratings system is itself a form of voting so it is easy to see how it can be adapted to work as a form of governance. In a sense, it is a form of ["open source" decision making]. Clearly a direct democracy imposes a burden on its citizens to participate in detailed policy decisions, a cognitive load which may well prove to be too much. Needless to say, with a direct democracy, citizens will have the ability to change their method of governance (say to a representative democracy). But many methods to lessen the cognitive load through technology will also exist.
In some ways, these methods will lead to [technocracy], a form of government where experts formulate policy for the common good. This is probably inevitable given the complexity of some issues and since the ratings system will be good at selecting those who are best able to work in given policy domains. If citizens assign their ratings weight to them, they will effectively have the power to make policy for the community. But technocracy also implies tools we give ordinary people to increase their participation in government.
We might note that any political system will hopefully be subject to a [political philosophy] that places our basic liberties as individuals vis a vis society as the highest goal. The philosophy of [John Rawls] seems to come closest to achieving this.