Corruption: the Achilles’ heel of all governments
All governments from democracies to socialist states are susceptible to corruption via bribes. In America and most other countries around the world there is a system of institutionalized bribery. In America, we are lucky that we have a lot less than many countries but we still have it, more concentrated at the higher levels than in many other governments.
<...>
Corruption is prevented in Randviscracy via randomly selected panels. Any decision or appointment can be contested and reviewed. Legal costs are paid by the contestor unless corruption is discovered, in which fines of the corrupt persons/entities will pay the legal costs of the contestor, their own legal fees and the costs incurred by the state, in addition to other penalties/fines.
Randviscracy is a form of government which makes extensive use of randomly selected panels for decision making. The use of randomization in governments is ancient, the Athenians used a device called a kleroterion to randomly select government representatives in a lottery system. Randviscracy takes the process much farther in that for each decision a new panel of randomly selected experts is selected. Selection is based on experience and IQ level to ensure that the panels are composed of smart and knowledgeable people. This gets to the essence of what ideal government representatives would be: intelligent, incorruptible and knowledgeable.
<...>
It would be important to keep the pool of experts and selected members a secret. In this way, people who wanted to bribe officials in the government would not even know whom to bribe. Again, as extra protection have independent panels to check the selection process on a random basis to verify integrity. These processes will help ensure there is minimal corruption, which is most government’s greatest weakness.
10 comments
Selection is based on experience and IQ level to ensure that the panels are composed of smart and knowledgeable people.
Meaning, of course, that the true power lies in those who hold informal control of who is put on the sortition lists, just like in the medieval Italian republics that tried.
PS:
Also, this seems absurdly overcomplicated and horribly anti-expertise.
This all sounded pretty reasonable (rule by jury might not be a good idea , but it’s not elitist crackpottery), until it got to the IQ tests.
The problem with any intelligence test is that intelligence is complicated and sought-after. People will try to game intelligence tests, even if it’s just for ego, and making IQ part of the process for picking leaders will only make that worse . Since intelligence is also complicated and multi-variant (photographic memory and fast reaction time, for example, are both aspects of intelligence, but are not the same thing), gaming the metrics would be very easy, because there’s a lot of room to hide bias in there.
p.s. Also, did you really need to make up a ninth name for this, or did Corey Daniels just want to imply that he somehow managed to be the first person in all history to come up with the idea of selecting leaders randomly?
Poorly designed idealist governments are a time honored tradition. Occasionally people even try to implement them and they go down in flames.
Selection is based on experience and IQ level to ensure that the panels are composed of smart and knowledgeable people.
So whoever gets the pick the secret list of experts gets all of the power.
I went to the original article to see if dude had more to say about where the name Randviscracy came from. It doesn’t and when I google the name the first few links are to this POS book. I didn’t want to waste precious brain power looking further and I feel like it’s pretty likely it comes from some kind of Ayn Rand worship bullshit. But I did notice the website has a disclaimer:
*Antisemitism/White Supremacist Disclaimer
When you see the mention of “Jews” anywhere on this site, I am referring to people who practice the Jewish supremacist teachings of the Talmud, those who are actively participating in the undermining of European people’s governments, such as B’nai B’rith, the ADL, George Soros’ many foundations, immigration lobbyists, AIPAC, etc. I would say Zionists, but that would not be correct, what I really mean are Frankists/Sabbateans, sayanim and dual-citizen/dual-loyalty politicians. Antisemitism is a label used to slander anyone who exposes these issues of Jewish supremacism, the overuse of the term antisemitism has made it meaningless. To those who cry “white supremecist!” – For example, they label identitarians/WN as white supremacists, when in reality we just see people as different, not superior and inferior. With Jewish supremacists, this is a case of psychological projection. According to the Talmud, when the Messiah(Moshiach) comes every Jew will have 2800 Gentile(goyim) slaves. And they “want Moshiach now! We don’t want to wait!”
So they’re one of those that tries to openly admit they are antisemitic and racist and claim they’re not at the same time. What a shock! /s
Why not just use a stochasticocracy? You have everyone vote anonymously, and then pick a random vote and ignore the rest. The influence of corruption is limited enormously; you have to bribe a lot more people and have no proof some of them didn’t just pocket the money and vote differently.
(Yeah, I know that there are a lot of problems with that idea as well, but it would at least be a lot cheaper and simpler.)
@Yutolia #159023
I feel like it’s pretty likely it comes from some kind of Ayn Rand worship bullshit.
Racist Ayn Rand worshippers, while I am just sure that’s a thing that exists, because of course it does, make no damn sense to me. I used to be a big fan of her, read most of her books and stuff. I’m not so much these days, but I don’t know how in the blue hell someone would claim to follow her philosophy and think that racism makes any damn logical sense. Ya know, she was all about “individualism” and rejecting “collectivism”….well, what’s more “collectivist” than judging a whole group of people based on things they had no control over?
Actual quote from her, which I rather like actually:
A genius is a genius, regardless of the number of morons who belong to the same race - and a moron is a moron, regardless of the number of geniuses who share his racial origin.
@Bastethotep #159011
This. We’re sitting here, RIGHT NOW, watching some of the dumbest fuckers in Congress decide what all of our kids get to learn in school.
Also, this system seems very unlikely that people will be held responsible for their decisions. I imagine a Brexit panel, selected in secret, meeting in secret, and then fucking off rather than taking part in implementing the decision they made, facing their critics, and justifying their secret decision
So whoever gets the pick the secret list of experts gets all of the power.
Oh, that's easy! Just have a random panel of journeymen pick each expert, and random panels of novices pick the journeymen! Oh, and don't forget the random panel of complete idiots, who pick up the lunch orders!
I prefer this solution: politicians give up all privacy for political power, the penalty for corruption is as severe as the one for treason, and applies to those who give bribes, as well as those who receive bribes, and anyone who facilitates the process.
In America, we are lucky that we have a lot less than many countries
It depends, if you acknowledge that lobbying is an important form of corruption...
Randviscracy takes the process much farther in that for each decision a new panel of randomly selected experts is selected. Selection is based on experience and IQ level to ensure that the panels are composed of smart and knowledgeable people.
I see an obvious flaw here. That's not random and those who will devise those selection processes can certainly be corrupt. Interpretations of IQ results can certainly be pseudoscientific too. Then I've seen some people claimed to have high IQs push a lot of nonsense. Being lost in your own universe is also a thing intelligent people do, especially when they're misled.
It would be important to keep the pool of experts and selected members a secret. In this way, people who wanted to bribe officials in the government would not even know whom to bribe.
Another interpretation of the same may be an absolutely corrupt opaque people, unaccountable. Or a false claim of such a backing machine behind a dictator.
Then you have to consider what is your definition of corruption, what is the end result you would like. It's easy to not find you credible after having read https://fstdt.com/GHRFT4M7Z6$23 ...
Oh, and have you ever read about transparency and its importance?
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.