Interview part 2

Copyright © DirectDemocracyS.

Second part of the interview with “GreatReferee”, user 283 of the international political organization DirectDemocracyS, and all related projects.

My questions had been sent to him well in advance, but he always spoke in an easy and clear way, as if he had the answers ready to other questions as well, so why not try in a nice and polite way, even to put him in trouble.

Question 10. Could you summarize the essence of DirectDemocracyS in a few words?

Answer 10. It would take days to explain, but I summarize in a few concepts. Politics does not exist, and perhaps it never did. There are economic powers, behind every important choice made by politicians and parties, demonstrated by huge conflicts of interest. What they pass off as democracy is a beautiful lie. It is slightly different from dictatorships, or from single parties (only for the freedom which is then only partial), but it is still a scam, of a few who decide and many who follow orders. Throughout the history of man, artificial divisions have always been created, all in order to control the various populations. The power that a voter gives to a party, or to a political "character", is not used in the interest of the people, in fact the voters are important for politicians and for parties, only on the day they go to vote. After gaining power, parties and political representatives almost never ask their voters for an opinion (if we exclude a few popular referendums on non-essential issues). The Constitutions and the Laws contain values and ideals that can be shared, but they are written in such a way as to never be put into practice, therefore they are often useless for the population.

I could go on for days to say what is wrong, but it would be boring. Also in our long articles we explain well how, and why they do it. Attention, the previous sentences, no one can deny them. Those who deny them have no critical sense, or perhaps they are colluding with economic and political power, or perhaps they have not read and analyzed them carefully.

DirectDemocracyS is innovation, it is something truly complete, even here it would take days to explain what we are, what we want to do, and above all months to explain how we will do it.

Simplifying: people know the political project, register on the website, get some information, and start working, a few minutes a day every day, they dedicate it to the good of themselves, their families, their friends, their own acquaintances and the entire world population.

Doing activities as you like in your free time, voluntarily and free of charge, and in the future also receiving remuneration and prizes. Generally they just do things, which they are really good at.

When the time is right, political parties will be founded, one in each country in the world.

All with the same rules, the same ideals, the same values, based on common sense, mutual respect for all people, and with very similar political programs (with minimal personalization and differences from country to country).

In the meantime, geographic groups will be organized online, starting from their neighborhood, or road block (in big cities), up to the whole world (where all our registered verified users will be gathered).

Each person votes online, in each geographic group they belong to.

In each group, each citizen elects our political representatives who will become our candidates in the royal elections. All according to detailed rules, tests, verifications and tests, and on a merit-based basis. Honesty, and utmost competence. It is not decided on the basis of popularity, but on the basis of professional knowledge.

The real innovation, however, consists and manifests itself after the vote in the real elections. In fact, every elected political representative, throughout his representation activity, before making any decision, must ask for a binding opinion, from his constituents (informed by groups of neutral and competent specialists), who are all verified registered users, in the groups in which he won the online elections.

For the first time in the world, the population decides the rules, the laws, and the political representatives apply them.

And for the first time in the world, anyone who registers on a site, and joins a project, becomes the owner of it.

I have tried to summarize, but there would be a lot of other information to give, to get a complete idea of what we want to do, and how we will do it. But just read our articles, on our website, to understand everything.

Question 11. It all seems clear, so DirectDemocracyS is practically a hybrid political project, because the political parties it will create will have political representatives, so it is representative democracy. Politicians chosen on the basis of skills and honesty, who are elected and take orders from the people directly, therefore with perfect direct democracy.

But why don't we have the name “HybridDemocracyS”, would it have been truly innovative?

Answer 11. Because we have an important purpose, over time we will almost completely eliminate the political class, leaving very few representative people. Maybe 1% of politicians will stay.

Because it makes no sense to spend a lot of money to keep so many politicians, when the best choices can be made by people who are informed in an honest, competent, complete, and sincere way.

Tell me, if so many people elected and often paid in an exaggerated way, to decide in our place, it means that really the best decisions are always made. I think not, but there is a waste of time and money. To change and improve things, we must still use the existing laws. So we will found our own parties (one in each country), and we will participate in the elections. According to the laws of each country.

With the money saved by eliminating at least 99% of politics, making it fair and democratic, important investments could be made, for the good of all, instead of giving them to people (the politicians ed), who almost all, only unnecessarily heat the comfortable seats , in which we have put them.

So in the future we will be less representative, and more much more direct. The name is fine, because it is the final one.

Question 12. But wouldn't the political confrontation be eliminated then?

No, the comparison would be made on right or wrong things, without ideologies invented to divide.

Always in geographical groups, always among people with different ideas, who decide for the good of all.

I'll give you a trivial example. Do you see the public garden near my house? Let's say that me and some of my neighbors, we wanted to put a swing for our children.

With the current policy, we would have to ask for a bunch of permits, and then those from the Municipality would come to do a bunch of projects, maybe doing public auctions, to choose who will carry out the projects and also the works, and many people would increase the costs (usually you steal a lot of money with public works and piloted auctions). In the end, the swing is either not done due to lack of funds, or it is done, wasting a lot of public money, perhaps by bringing in contractors, from far away, with damage to the environment and the local economy.

In the neighborhood group on DirectDemocracyS, it is decided all together to put the swing, a specialist of the group gives (or does it at low cost because interested) his project to the community, it is put to the vote, then we ask our politicians , to vote all in favor. After the vote in the City Council, a group of people, under the supervision of specialists, does the work, with local companies (for complex works), and work begins immediately. In a few days, spending little money, employing local people, we will have the swing. As soon as the concrete foundation dries, children can start playing. Less waste of community money, and more profit for local businesses, for the environment.

The same applies to political confrontation, which we believe should be based on ideas: right or wrong, useful or useless, not on dead and buried ideologies, or on more or less legitimate personal interests.

Because you waste time and above all money, to see political parties, who argue over things of little importance, only to show that they work. And then by deceiving, the vote of the people to whom they say, exactly what they want to hear (often instilling fear and resentment).

In fact, each party is aimed at a more or less large section of society. For us there is right or wrong, common sense or nonsense. Yes or no. They destroy our life, with compromises, almost always to the detriment of good people. Not to mention the promises and statements they make before they are voted on by us. They almost always do different things, so they don't respect agreements.

Question 13. Perhaps the most difficult. Can you explain the difference between a political representative and an official representative?

Answer 13. The political representative is the politician elected by the population, online candidate, candidate in the real elections, and then elected for the various roles, who asks the binding opinion, from the groups from which he was elected. So the people always decide.

The official representative is appointed to check that everything is carried out in a free and correct way, according to our rules of common sense, always taking into consideration the values and ideals we have.

Both figures are essential, because they have different "powers" and tasks. Political representatives must do "only" their work of representation, without having to worry about the management of parties, carefully managed and controlled by official representatives (who have no representative role). In this way we eliminate the conflict of interest of politicians (the cause of much of the world's ills).

Obviously all, both the elected and the nominated, are chosen on the basis of merits, skills and honesty, among all our verified registered users (therefore always the people). Anyone with skills can lend a hand to the success of all our activities.

The official representatives form “linked chains” of project management, in order to completely eliminate any probability that our entire innovative “system” could risk failure. We have created specific rules, and very long articles in which we explain how everything works.

Question 14. Many will ask, is this legal?

Answer 14. Of course it is Legal. But it is also fair and ethical. For the simple reason that in our political project, and in all our related projects, there are verified registered users, which are the population, that it is right that it holds all the political power, and that it decides and holds control at any time, on all the choices to be made by their political representatives.

Question 15. But then will the political representatives in our country be people without ideas, without any rights, practically not involved in politics?

Answer 15. This question was not foreseen. But I want to answer, because it is very important to make all these concepts understand. Political representatives, in order to run, will have to be verified, literally in every possible way. But like everyone, they are people like you and me, who, during online and real electoral campaigns, will have to show their skills, have ideas, confront other candidates and their potential voters.

Once elected, they themselves will be able to propose topics, activities, discussions, debates, and ask for opinions that are always binding, and always voted and decided by their constituents. So political work takes place normally. Except that with us, the people are the ones who decide, and the politician who puts it into practice.

In current politics, all over the world, politicians dictate the rules (they make the Laws), so they are the puppeteers.

And we, the population, the voters, who respect them, without any decision-making power, are the puppets in their hands.

With DirectDemocracyS, politicians carry out the orders of their informed voters, who are the puppeteers, and our political representatives, who put their voters' decisions into practice, then they are the puppets.

Let's reverse the roles, finally giving, for the first time in the world, the power in the hands of those who must have it by right. Democracy means power to the people. Nowhere in the world, if not perhaps in Ancient Greece, have the people ever known true democracy.

Question 16. A personal question. "GreatReferee" why this name?

Answer 16. Because at the beginning, we thought of calling the appointed persons by the name of referees, to check compliance with rules, values, ideals.

In fact, in older informative articles, he often finds the word referees, combined with official representatives. Referees because they are neutral, they do not participate in the game, but they check that everything is done correctly.

Lately, we have been calling them official representatives, but they are the same people, and they perform the same tasks.

After all, if you watch a sports match, you hardly notice the referees, or remember their name.

Unless they make very serious errors of assessment (and here he smiled ed). People have to watch the sportsmen, who are the elected political representatives.

We “referees” limit ourselves to giving support, even with groups of specialists. To always make the best decisions, in the interest of the entire population.

To make this important interview published in a simple way, in all languages, we divide it into various parts. See you soon with the third party. Find out, visit our website, find out in detail, and only then join us. Share everything with as many people as possible, because it is in everyone's interest to know about the existence of our and your project. Thank you.