Warning: this is high level logistical information on decision making, most people wont want to know all this, but for those who do, it is very important for any publicly accountable organization to be transparent and open about how we intend to make decisions. Especially decisions that could effect milliions if not billions of people.
If you are interested in just helping make collaborative decisions, just go to the Org Identity page at this link.
This page is specifically referring on the process of making decisions regarding how we make decisions as a group of people running the global website and framework for our global community. We also go into empowering the glocal network to make decisions regarding the Global General Strike. So read this with a grain of salt and remember all of this needs to get worked out and consented to in detailed sessions with questions and answers. You can vote on both the general text on the page and reasons given, as well as the proposals themselves.
If you really think about it, the General Strike project doesn’t have a lot of decisions that need to be made. You can boil down the total number of primary decisions to just about 4. The vast majority of decisions are all made at the regional and local level, and certainly any individual country can choose to do their own national general strike at anytime separate from our coordinated global strike.
List of 4 Primary Agreements
- Agreement and verification that the 300+ people required for the Global Strike to be successful are all registered and actively communicating. In other words agreement we are ready to strike.
- Agreement that the demands are finalized and ready to be presented to the world right before the strike begins.
- Agreement on the date the strike will begin with all 300+ million people across the world.
- Agreement that all or enough of our demands have been met to end the strike.
Again, Besides these four decisions, the vast majority of everything happening and being decided happens at the local and regional levels which are much more complicated. Local levels could even choose to have additional local demands that they could pressure for their country or region that are not applicable to the global strike. Individual unions could even have specific requirements for the business that they are striking, so at the local level there can always be additional decisions made, as local communities have the most power.
So basically if these 4 decisions are more or less the only important decisions that need to be made at the global level. So how do we make them in a decentralized and bottom up way? A Decentralized Federated Network of strike organizations.
Each organization in the federation is simply recognized by the other organizations in the federation. Through recognition, we stabilize the empowerment of all local organizations thought the entire general strike federated network. So this brings us to our first proposal.
| Proposal: Agreement that we empower any organization that is recognized by the majority of their national, state, or county strike organizations? Details: if there is 1 organization in a nation, state, or county they would automatically be recognized, 2 would required consensus, then 2 of 3 organizations, then 3 of 4 organizations , then 3 of 5 organizations, then 4 of 6 organizations, and so on and so on. Any organization that is recognized would have an official vote. If problems arize and two or more fighting fractions break apart within a single community or county, then the state, national, and eventually global organizations can eventuate and settle while organizations are legitimate. In the same way, if a global or national organization is no longer legitimate, the local organizations can settle who is legitimate. That means that our website, and organization is only valid if recognized and can be removed from applicability at anytime. |
Note: We could set criteria of what does and does not constitute a organization, but that doesn’t matter for 2 reasons. One is that recognition already empowers local organizations to make that criteria for themselves. Second we are proposing much more than just a federated organization model of decentralized decision making, which empowers much more than just organizations.
If we have empowered local and all other strike organizations through recognition. The next step is to build the broader structure through a multi-stakeholder model. This is essencial to ensuring all rights are upheld, rights of the majority and rights of the minorities.
| Proposal: Agreement that we build a Multi-Stakeholder federated membership of strike organizations, people, cultures, and communities. Details: Anyone can join and be empowered within our Strike Organizations, and hold them accountable. This ensures that power is distributed beyond the decentralized federated structure, to have a balance of power between organizations, people, cultures and communities. Simply put, if the organizations do not act within the will of the people, cultures, and communities that make them up they are no longer recognized. |
The foundation of the decentralized and distributed structural model is similar to what we would want to see for our society. That our organizations, institutions, corporations, and governments always adhere to the will and needs of the people, the cultures and the communities that make them up. The moment that relationship is broken, recognition can be revoked. And that is what the strike is all about, we are revoking recognition of the old organizations that no longer acknowledge our needs as people, as cultures and as communities. But we need to go further to make that point very clear. And instead of using old 18th century democracy, we are going to evolve democracy into the 21st century and build the foundation of our decentralized democracy using science.
| Proposal: Agreement that we use demographic democracy as a foundation to enhance the vision and voice of all people, cultures, communities languages, races, and minorities, with a balance of power distributed through a multocracy of decision making methods. This includes but not limited to the following; representative, direct, and participatory democracy, while striving towards consensus (individual consent), and requiring no less than majority rule, using scientifically recognized forms of score voting. Details: Everyone is empowered to evole democracy as long as it increases empowerment of people, cultures, communities including languages, races, all of which are minorities. That includes white people (about 15%), as white people are by definiton a minority just like every other race culture and community on our planet. There is no majority in any single group of people when you look at the bigger picture. This also gives flexibility to use science to demographically empower any minority that can be documented. It is not perfect, but certainly better than just vote in the richest white person to take all power. From there we use scientific models of score voting to ensure we don’t end up in the natural progression of hyper polarization. |
Without going into tons of detail on demographic democracy, for our purposes of global organizing, our top priority is to empower cultures and languages across the world. There is nothing more important than empowering culture and language. We are loosing 1000’s of languages, and once they go extinct they are gone, and all we have left is capitalism and billionaries. #LifeOverProfits means also empowering other cultures not just our own. It is hard to explain, but the core foundation of saving cultures and languages is direct empowerment. If your culture is dependent on translation, then you simply do NOT exist. Period. A culture and language is alive because of its existence and ability to make decisions to evolve and change overtime. That requires empowerment and decision making. Period.
| Proposal: To directly Empower All Languages and Cultures through demographic democracy, where each language and culture is empowered to make their own decisions in their native tongue, no translation required, and overall decisions strive towards consensus between all languages and cultures, but require a minimum majority of languages. World views and strategic models are also similar and are empowered. Details: Simply put, english has no power to make decisions, and has no power to control translation of decisions. No human translator, or any automated or AI translation service, or any other potential future model of translation whether in real-time or asynchronously can control, pressure, oversee, or in any way directly disempower a culture or language. Each cultural language has a direct right to make any and all decisions that effect them in their native tongue. Each culture and language is empowered to change the text and information for the proposal to match their native culture and mannerisms without any translation requirements related to any and all other cultures. To make a multi-cultural multi-language decision, we can start with a draft crapy translation, but then we would need a minimum of 5 languages to independently organize within their native tongue to review, scrutinize, questions, and evaluate what is presented. This includes full immersive dialogue, discussion, collaboration, and achieve agreement independently within each cultural language to reach the minimum majority required. You can see the table bellow with the top 25 first language of native tongue. Therefore it would take as many as 25 separate languages to reach an official majority decision, and most likely many many more. This may seem like way too much work and will slow us down, but if we are serious about #LifeOverProfits, we must priorities people, cultures, and communities over speed. It is important to note that in addition to cultures and languages, world views and strategic models are also empowered and protected, but exist within a language. |
There is a lot more to go through, but this is a good start to have set up a proper majority democratic decision making model that strives towards consensus to ensure individual consent and empower stike organizations, individual cultural languages, and people across the world to make decisions together to oversee the global strike process in a decentralized and distributed model.
Obviously it is also fine to change the decision making model, or to spin off and create a separate global organization and website if people do not want to follow existing FQN/SFC COOP policy for global and decentralized organizing.
| Proposal: To spin off and create a new global website with different decision making models? |
Other ideas for decision making, please make a comment or reply bellow.
Leave a Reply