Project Idemocrazia

The basic concepts upon which we propose the platform are the following: 1. The proposed system should not work like a pure direct democracy platform but like a hybrid system, something between a traditional political party of a representative democracy system western style and the utopian and idealistic direct democracy platforms listed above. The goal of the system is to have a political party that takes input for the law creating process not from the special interests or the lobbies but from a political platform created by political activists and voted by a large number of people.  2. The system would comprise three entities:1. a Party whose structure would be very similar to that of any political party we have today in Western countries and whose role would be that of promoting in the Parliament (Chamber and Senate) the proposals of law created within the platform2. a Commission that would supervise the daily work of the platform in a strictly technical sense and make sure that a realistic political program based on laws voted by the people and covering all major aspects of the political and social life, verify that there are no inherent contradiction within the program, calendarize the vote within the system, assign each proposal of law to a category and so on. The already created program will then be given to the Party which will then promote it within the parliamentary system.3. The registered activists of the Platform itself. All activity of the Party should be strictly regulated and monitored by the activists, however the Party would still have some room to independently slightly , integrate the proposals of law and do some extra law making process. 3. All voting and law proposals submission must be completely transparent and traceable to the voters. It must be possible to check who voted for which law, who delegated who and have easy access to all the info. 4. Both the political party people and the commission would have some (limited) margin to merge, slightly modify, propose and integrate the political program in order to make it more consistent and viable, all such side activity must be properly documented and explained. 5. The main output in actual terms from the platform and its activity by the activists, should be at the beginning not any kind of political activity but instead the creation of a political program that comprises all the laws voted by the users and organized in an easily readable and structured document. The use of simple chapters for each of the section of the platform may not be enough and it may be that sub-chapters may be needed. For example, the military should cover all theexpenses and all the procurements. 1 Military1.1 Military procurement1.1.1 Military procurement - planes1.1.2 Military procurement - submaries1.2 Bases1.2.1 Domestic military basis1.2.2 Foreign military basis 6. No discussion or law amendment in the system. The only thing that the usual voter can and should do is to read a topic and then choose between a limited numbers of law proposals around that topic. The law creation and law amendment process should be done by activists, groups of special interests and so on who have the time and the resources to create proposals of law without help. Each proposal of law should be backed by a number of electronic signatures inorder to be accepted and voted upon. Finally, all the existing process should be done with the supervision of the Commission. Proposals of laws should be categorized in sections for easy of use. 7. There should be as much feedback as possible about the Party activity back to the voters. The feedback should be as transparent as possible. 8. Delegation can be done by sector, can be overwritten anytime, can be removed anytime and can be refused at will. Delegation is an important issue in the system. Delegation in the system can be:1. Temporary2. Over writable3. Given for a specific section only4. Checkable by the delegated5. Can be refused by the delegated9. The commission should be voted in every year or every other year with the possibility of impeaches it in case of gross fraud. The political party people should sign a paper before being elected in office that they guarantee to leave the mandate in case the political base votes them outeven before the end of their legal mandate. 10. Activist groups and individuals can raise an issue and propose solutions for the issue. Proposals of solution for the issue will be called as “proposals of laws” and there may be more than one proposal of law for every issue raised. 11. In order to raise an issue and bring forward a proposal of law for that issue, a minimum number of electronic signatures by members of the platform for that particular issue/proposal of law creation. All the activity related to writing down a proposal of law for a particular issue and gather the signatures needed to put forward those in the system are all activities to be done outside the system. The Commission shall only receive from an individual or activist group the issue with the proposal of law addressing that issue and a number of signatures of other people supporting the voting for that issue. 12. The whole political activity shall be divided into sections (Defence, Education, Environment, Health Care and others) in order to rationalize and streamline the process of law proposal and voting. The whole activity of deciding on which sections each issue and proposal of law belongs to has to be done by the Commission. 13. People allowed to vote in the system must be registered. The process of registration must be rigorous and the details of each voter and his/her participation in the system must be open and checkable by anybody else. The process of registering new voters for the first time must be done by checking their documents and identity before the release of a password that will allow the voter to work on the system. This check must be done by some senior voter delegated for theactivity by the Commission. It should be possible to invite people of other countries to express their non-binding opinion. 14. Once an activist or a group or people bring forward an issue and a proposal of law for that issue, the commission checks if everything OK and then inserts the issue and proposal of law into the system according to the section of pertinence. Once this has been done, for a limited period of time other people can propose laws for the same issue so that there may be multiple different proposals of law for one single issue. Each and one proposal of law must be backed by a numberof signatures. 15. In addition to the multiple choice voting format, the commission and the activists may decide to put forward a multiple-tree option voting format1. OK like it is2. We need to change2.1 Death penalty decision left to single states2.2. Country-unified policy for death penalty2.2.1 We should have no death penalty at all2.2.2 We should have death penalty2.2.2.1 We should have death penalty in just some particular 16. The whole process of submission of issues and proposals of laws, check, voting and results consists of the following steps:1. An individual or a group of individuals (the activists) finds an issue worth discussing and creates a proposal of law for that specific issue. Then the people or the group of activists writes down the issue to be voted upon in detail along with the proposal(s) of law for that issue. Then, they gather the electronic signature of other people who are also registered in the system and, if the number reaches the minimum number, they submit it to the commission. 2. Once the issue and proposal of law is checked and found OK for being voted upon in the system, the whole details of the issue and proposal of law(s) are published and categorized in a section and there is a short period of time (3 months, maybe) for other groups to read the issue/proposal of law, digest it, and possibly submit alternative proposals of law for the same issue (with signatures). Once the additional proposals of law have been found OK, they will be published along with the original one. 3. After this period of three month expires, the commission will calendarize the voting on the issues. Voting can be done in one step (most voted proposal of law gets all) or maybe become better in two steps (first two most voted proposals of law will then be voted upon one according to the decision of the commission. The details of who signed to support which proposal, who voted for which proposal, should be open and transparent in the system.Proposals of law voted upon become part of the public program of the system which then will be used by the Party as political platform. People of other countries will be allowed to express their non-binding opinion. 17. The Commission will then have some limited power to temporarily halt a proposal of law in case it I badly written, to merge voting on issues which are similar in content, to postpone on issues which have already been voted upon recently, to ask clarifications about issue/proposal of laws, etc. The Commission may have some power to suggest proposals of laws for issues brought forward in case such proposals of laws are already mainstream and talked about in the political arena. 18. In order to avoid possible confusion, there will be two kinds of users in the system, users delegating and user delegated. Delegating users are the real users who either vote or delegate somebody else to do it, Delegated users are virtual users and they can be a party, an organization, a political group, an individual and therefore are not real users but virtual users. Any individual in the system can have up to two accounts, one for his delegating profile, and one for hisdelegated profile, as a single user, or as a representative of a group of people. 19. The major characteristic of the system must be its simplicity. The vast majority of the people cannot and do not want to spend too much time dealing with a complicated voting system.However, it is strictly necessary to have a system that can appeal to the masses in order to have a real platform for the people. Therefore, the concept of easy delegation and of simplicity of use must be taken care of. The average user must be able to log into the system, easily browse among each section, find the issue of interest, vote easily among a few easily-readable proposals. 20. One of the characteristics of the proposed system would of not having a Party that merely brings forward the political program created by the people with the help of the Commission in institutional places, but have the same Party too give feedback to the people about their activities in a transparent way. For example, the Party should allow independent filming of the meetings, encourage the people to vote on the different proposals that came out from the meetingTake for example the issue of fracking: he Party would not only publish all the discussions in the internet, but also promote discussions between proponents and opponents of franking, invite experts to discuss the problem, film everything an put everything in. At the end of the debate there should can conclusion with various proposals for the problem and people should be allowed to vote on the proposal that they prefer and this proposal should be considered as the one to become part of the program Issues concerning other countries and other organizations should be dealt with public open meetings with the counterpart. For example, the party leadership should organize debates around the Iranian nuclear program with the necessary participation of the US and Iranian counterparts, together with a selected number of journalists and activists and the whole debate to be streamed in the internet with subtitles both in English and Farsi. 21. The Party would propose the use of so-called “Moon shots” for solving existing problems in the world. 22. It is to be silently agrees that all the users that take part in the process would then support the political party linked to the system during the actual country and state election.The proposed system would have the following advantages and disadvantages:1. Transparency: everything in the system will be completely transparent, including the support for laws, who has proposed which law, who has signed and who have voted for what. All the voting will be directly traceable from the user so that all the activity related to each user can be directly checked. There must be a profile page for each user that describes in detail the activity within the system and a button that allow any other user to blow the whistle and report the page of a user which may be suspect of being a sock-puppet or a fake user. While some people may be worried that such openness may lead to violation of the privacy of vote, in the opinion of the writer the advantages of having an open system vastly outweigh the disadvantages and straightforward.2. Appeal to the masses. It is of paramount importance that a large part of the population takes part in the political process, otherwise people will not see the political platform as their own and will not support it the country and/or state elections. The minimum required political activity for theaverage user should be reduced to the bare minimum, that is, to delegate another user or group of users and get involved in the voting process only from time to time. Any user would then be able to overwrite a previous delegation. The actual process of voting and/or overwrite a delegationshould be easy for the average user: he/she must open the application, navigate to the section of ssues of interest, find the issue he/she wants to vote upon, read the description of the issue, vote for the proposal of law that is best in his/her opinion and do this in less than 5 minutes.Therefore, a solid user interface is needed.3. Ease of use. See above.4. The system would not require any changes to the Constitution and not even require the creation of a new political party . (at least at the beginning)5. Accountability of who does what. The Commission should keep an open page writing which new issues have been discussed, which have or have not been accepted in a transparent mode so that they can keep accountable. www,


No discussions have been started yet.