C U R I O U S M A N I F E S T O S
(POLITISTICS)
— — — — —
CONTENTS
*
[ * All names of the parties /movements /etc. in Bulgarian original have abbreviations with three
letters, which peculiarity isn't easy to maintain in the translation, so the letters are more often different. ]
Foreword
Manifesto of the DDD (Deliberate Democratic Dictatorship) Movement
Addendum to DDD
Manifesto of the EEE (Enigma of the Exploitative Elite)
Manifesto of the ZSG (Zodiacal Significance Group)
Addendum to ZSG
Manifesto of the IIE (Initiative for Iterative Elections)
Manifesto of the CCW (Corrupted Cadres Wing)
Manifesto of the NNO (New Nomenclature's Offensive)
Manifesto of the FCP (Forever Changing Party)
Addendum to FCP
Manifesto of the BRD (Believers in the Reasonable Difference)
Addendum to BRD
Manifesto of the USC (Union for Strength and Competition)
Manifesto of the TTT (Tandem for Total Totalization)
Manifesto of the FFF (Feminism Forcing Formation)
Manifesto of the CCC (Civilized Centralization and Circuses)
Addendum to CCC
Afterword
Supplement: Hurray, Is It Possible (Government of the Reasonable Alternative)?
— — — — —
PART FIVE
MANIFESTO OF THE TTT
(Tandem for Total Totalization)
The history of all societies
is a history of victories and defeats, of
gains and losses
! The desire of everyone to win in whatever of his activities, either directly he, or through the victory of humans (or animals) who he supports or on whom he
, is indestructible (i.e. it can be destroyed only with the human alone). This is the strongest emotion because on this world, as the saying goes, "man proposes but God disposes", so that it can never happen that one only wins (or, God forbid, only loses) and this game will become boring for him. On account of this before 25 centuries in Ancient Greece was introduced the democracy as one
, in each everyone (with small exception and many luck) can win — either he alone, or at least his people, who wining through him give him the hope (well, often illusory, but supporting the human) that later he, in his turn, may win with their help. This is the greatest intellectual achievement of civilization of those times in the social sphere which carries many emotions and shows for the population and satisfies the imperishable human desire for gains!
But is this achievement thought through, i.e. whether the contemporary democracy is the best and most spectacular, is there not omitted in it the most important element of our world — its uncertainty and arbitrariness —, does is not rely insufficiently little on the luck of everybody, and if there exists something better then is it attainable? In short, does it exist some way to better this
and if it exists then what is it? We answer affirmative to all this questions because we approach them scientifically and motivated! But in order to explain the things let us first have a better look at the democratic choice, for to find one main feature of it, after what to look how we can make it better, proposing one, not only more adequate, but
choice — the
(TT).
1. About the unreasonable choice
The democratic choice, really, is one epochal achievement, because no one "normal" (i.e. ordinary, or on the average intelligent) human being could have reached alone to it (a person from the public may like one or another king, but he will never come to the thought to set his own candidature for a "king"), and that is why the democracy was
initiated by the folks but was imposed in the beginning from above, because
this choice
, in truth,
contradicts to the common sense
, and that is, maybe, its most significant characteristic! The simplest confirmation of this statement is the fact that such choice
wherever, where
some work must be done, i.e. there is no enterprise where by the choice of a director or head of section they gather all common workers, porters, cleaners etc., and tell them to choose one between them for this position. It is not applied, of course, the democratic choice, neither in the army, nor in the organizations for law and order, nor in the learning institutions, nor in the health care, and even in the families one usually has the decisive word on given kind of questions, and they do not gather each time to vote (together with their infant children).
This is so because (if one decides to ponder a little about this)
the democratic choice presupposes that: people who
(i.e. don't know the domain of governing and have not finished managerial courses)
have to choose persons who they
(apart from having seen them a pair of times on the TV, but there some people live together for a decade and at the end it turns out that they have not known one another well, and what else leaves in our case), and by this
don't require
from the candidates whatever
, i.e. for "driving of the state's carriage", nor subject them to some examination (say, in outwitting), and at the end they even
don't know
, save that they think they will like to be ruled by them. By this circumstances it is entirely obvious that in this way the choice of a person, who will be able to do the work,
simply
!
Notwithstanding this, however, the democratic choice
needed
for millenniums, and especially in the last centuries is applied in more and more countries around the world! So that: how is it possible that people, who are not chosen to do some specific work, are still able to do it? Well, exactly in this is the extraordinary importance of this decision, in sense that
but
! The important thing in this case is that the people are asked what they think (for to have no reasons later to be angry), but what they will decide
critical meaning, where in practice is even
! Such solution is called "
", because it is distorted, partial solution. Generally speaking, there
are
how people, who are not chosen specifically for a given work, are able, still, to do it, namely: a) when
, but have enough competent assistants, who do the work instead of them; and b) when
, because it is not very difficult and whoever alternative candidate would have acted in the same way! It is possible, of course, also some combination of these methods. In other words, important is
of the candidate, but the process of choosing, important is the spectacle of the choice or
!
But if the democratic choice is irrational it has to be at least
! We may put it otherwise: when the reasonability of the choice is in its
(as choice), so let it be at least
in this sense and not "reasonably unreasonable", because the existing democratic elections, in their intent to be reasonable (without understanding what exactly is the reasonable), only spoil the choice
so, that instead of some
chosen unsuitable candidates there are chosen (very often) intentionally
ones! So for example, if we cast a coin and bet always only on the head we can lose much more then if we set each time in some arbitrary manner, because, as the people have marked already in ancient times: what is the event, if not interference of God in our choice?
The choice by "reasonable" criteria unavoidably sets some filter over the candidates and in this way violates one major (though, alas, rarely met) element of democracy — the
. We would have had similar situation by the choice of jurors in the law suits in some western countries if have set requirements for them to be, say, only white, or not to be women, to be not older than 60, etc., where it is clear that the unique requirement in this case must be for them to be (arbitrary chosen) common people! Said in another way: the uniformly distributed random numbers are the surest method for
in the democratic choice, because they move our unreasonable notions for the reasonable (from the point of view of particular individual) near to the divine understanding for the reason, as reasonable
, not individually. Resumed, this boils down to the allegation that
the arbitrariness is necessary, and the necessity — arbitrary
(something that each one, who has studied at least for a while the probabilistic theory, must have known)!
If we once arrive at the conclusion that must look for
the arbitrariness
or randomness
as the most
, there are no problems to make it more interesting, because the main factor that diminishes the spectacularity of the democratic elections is ...
of the candidates! If one knows, for example, the result of a given football match, because it was already played, there are not many people who would have watched it (say, as video record); the situation is similar also in our case, and for this reason there are few elections in the world where vote more than 85% of the population. Besides, one usually is interested not in the probability for
to win or lose, but whether
may be one of the winners! Now it becomes clear what must be done, because the situation would have been entirely different if people
for whom exactly they vote (but, naturally, know that give their voices for "their" people) and if have a chance (even very small one) for
to be chosen — because, no matter that there are multiple reserves in the candidates by the existing elections, at most one person out of 10,000
to be chosen. In other words, everywhere on the world people are, still, wide away from the ideal (but wholly realizable) decision for the choice and this is so because till now the question simply was not properly set. Only we, from the
Tandem for Total Totalization
(TTT), have found this decision, which we explain below.
2. New procedure of elections
The proposed by TTT new variant of democratic elections requires very insignificant changes in the Election Law and can be applied simultaneously with all left conventional parties and coalitions where the candidates are chosen according to the existing unreasonable way: by made in advance list of candidates, without educational (or whatever other) qualification, by the incompetent masses of citizens, and also without representativeness of the selection and without any chance for the millions of voters to enter the Parliament. This, what we require, is that in advance
be known only the number of candidates
but
actual
names
, for to be possible for each of the electors who accepts our conditions and participates in some Tandem (there are no problems to exist various and different such groups — by age, professions, education, and so on) to have chance to be elected in the Parliament (or Municipalities, or for President, respectively). We give below the exact procedures in different kinds of elections.
2.1. Parliamentary elections
The arbitrary democratic choice imposes two
phases, namely: of
(or participants in the choice) for a given Tandem, in which phase is established the number of candidates, and
, which is the most attractive part of the actual arbitrary choice, so that in sum (with the very election) we have three phases. They are performed as follows:
а)
The forming of the pool
is done for each election again and consists in official registration in the respective for the purpose bureaus of the Tandems, against paying of some minimal tax (because there are no reasons such expenses to be borne by the State Treasury, when each participant may personally win out of this democratic game). The registration may be done also by post, in which case has to be applied the quittance for the sent sum of money. After this in period of two weeks to the participants must be sent postcards with their consecutive number (it is the important thing) as official confirmation of their including in the pool. Two weeks before the election day these registration bureaus conclude their work and announce the total
of participants in them — let's name it
. Because for each election is known in advance the whole amount of electors and the number of places for which is voted, is determined and announced officially the representativeness of one place, which we shall mark with
. Then we propose the number of candidates for MPs for the Tandem to be computed by the formula:
(i.e. with double reserve, but not less then three persons).
For our country, if we take roughly 6 mln. voters for 200 places in the Parliament, we get
. If now in our Tandem we have enlisted
participants then the number of candidates who it will propose for the elections will be
persons, rounded according to the rules. Who exactly these persons are, however, will remain a secret for everybody, because nobody will vote for the Tandem if he knows that
between the candidates, where by existing obscurity, but entirely
, each one to turn out to be one of them, he can succeed to persuade (till the last moment) some of his acquaintances, relatives, or members of the family, which are not officially registered in this Tandem, to vote for it. This makes the elections really free and democratic, where there are no problems this principle of unknownness of the concrete candidates to be applied also by each of the existing parties, because the voters, anyhow, vote most often for the party /coalition, not for personalities.
b)
The official general election
is performed in the known stile where the Tandems are taken for kinds of parties. There is nothing new here so that we continue directly with the next phase.
c)
The ending phase
of the choice, or the choice as such of the representatives from a given Tandem, is performed from three to 10 days
the day of elections and is shown by the National Television. Because each of the registered people have its own unique number is performed drawing of the established on the phase a) amount of numbers, but in a way which excludes all possibilities, as much as for falsifying, also for some clusterization, i.e. choosing of adjacent numbers. We propose to be drawn
of the number
of their writing! For our country the maximal pool can be at most with seven digits, but when it has less digits is drawn only the needed minimal number of digits, when each number out of the real borders is rejected and the choice is repeated again. Under this condition in the choosing sphere are loaded four groups of the digits from 0 to 9 (for not to rotate the sphere almost empty), where each digit of the number is taken out, it is written down, and is
again in the sphere, and so on until the needed number of digits is drawn, and for every new number is performed new loading of the sphere (not because this in necessary, but in order to check again all digits). It is possible, of course, to do also simultaneous drawing of all digits in several spheres.
These numbers form with reserve one
, where for reasons of objectiveness of the choice, as also for greater emotions of the participants, we propose that the drawn numbers will
be treated as ordered
in the sequence of their drawing, but will be use as basis for one more drawing — this time for ordering in the list. For this purpose the drawn already persons (the relation between the number and the person is made at once) are ordered in increasing order of UCN (Unique Citizenship Number), or in alphabetical order of the names (how it is established), receiving corresponding numbers. After this the sphere is loaded with all numbers from one to the last sequential number in this list and is performed drawing of
these numbers
only
for establishing of their ordering
in the list, where the persons with numbers greater than the sum of won mandates (i.e. drawn later in this last drawing) are taken for reserves (how it is also by the classical elections).
Something more, in order to allow the possibility, if someone wishes this, to separate the winning from the work, we propose that each chosen in this way MP has the right to withdraw from actual participation in the Parliament, receiving in this case the half of the due to him (or her, surely) salary, and on his place enters the first next reserve
to work for the
(here one half) salary, where this rule can be applied every time during the mandate and unlimited number of times with even more diminishing salary (say, by two candidates who have rejected their participation, the third will receive only 1/4 of the salary — as much as the second — but will be full MP in each other regard). In this elementary way the paid salary for one seat will be always one and the same. If occasionally, for different reasons, the made list is consumed (what is practically unbelievable in view of our double reserve), then there are no problems for drawing of more numbers (say, 1/2 of initially drawn), because the pool is enormous. This is how we may have: free and democratic elections, together with chance for everyone
to take part in the governing of the country, as well as representative and not distorted selection from a given Tandem, and, last but not least, extreme emotions for the population!
2.2. Elections for Municipal Councils
For them new forming of the pool is necessary, because the Tandems may be different (for example, on territorial principle), but as far as they are very similar and go through the same phases of the elections for Parliament we shall mention only some small distinctions. By the forming of the pool is clear that it will be significantly smaller and the representativeness of one place (
) will be different for each urban area, where it may fall up to about 5,000, but the formula with double reserve leaves the same. This diminishing, of course, means enhancing of the chances for winning and the emotions of the people! In the ending phase, again because of the number of participants, are drawn numbers with 5 or 4 digits, and the sixth digit may be needed only for the capital.
2.3. Elections of President
Here the things are a little bit more complicated because the point is to choose only two persons from a given party or Tandem, where firstly must be established the exact party. Of course, if the political power is already known it will be in position easily (by the preferred by it method) to show the required pair for President and Vice-president, so that the main emphasis falls on the choice of this power. Let is not forget that the people vote not so much for the person as for the party which stays behind him (because one must, somehow, base his decision on something, when he can't know well enough the person), because of what we believe that individual candidates, i.e. people who have significantly different platforms for to be united with some of the existing parties, but have not enough influence for building of their own party, simply have no place as candidates for this important post. Under this condition the need for new general elections is eliminated, because may be taken that the quotas of political powers in the Parliament already solve the question with the choice of political power (though there are no problems for new voting, but only for the party /Tandem), yet direct applying of one such rule will make the things very boring and undemocratic, so that the right decision requires again some
, but such that will take care of the
of parliamentary quotas, and will also provide good emotions. All other variants have their disadvantages.
And really, if the Parliament chooses the President personally according its meaning, this choice may reflect the meaning of the majority in the Parliament, but there is no guaranty that such is the meaning of the whole nation (especially if there are parties and not only Tandems in it, what distorts its representativeness; but also because the current meaning of the nation changes very fast, where Parliament remains one and the same during its entire mandate); and if the President is elected directly by the people then there is no guaranty that they know him well enough for to make reasonable choice (the folks may choose
, but not more capable candidate, besides, the majority also may make errors, even more often, due to the so called instinct of the "herd"). In the same time by our proposition in help of the electors comes the event or
(i.e. the intervention of God), as the most impartial arbiter, because all candidates are in their way
people from the masses! In any case we eliminate the possibility for lengthy and unreasonable debates, which often lead to deadlock, when happens something like the known from ancient times example with the donkey of Buridan, which animal was so intelligent that beginning to feed always has chosen the bigger heap with straw (for not to be duped by another donkey who will get the bigger heap), but once, seeing two perfectly equal heaps of straw, has begun to go around and around and to wonder from which one to begin to eat, and he went for so long that at the end ... died of hunger, because did not succeed to make his
choice.
So that the phases here are four, where the first three are to be applied on national level, and for this purpose are necessary some more changes in the Election law. Though related with the Tandems they don't reject the parties at all, which may impose their own methods of choice of the
President /Vice-president (on the last phase), but require only the necessary measures for
proportional random choice
of the political power. Specifically for the Tandems new registration and payment are not needed because are used the numbers from the Parliamentary elections. Let us clarify more precisely these phases.
а)
First of all must
be formed the percentual Presidential pool for the country
, which consists of 100 places (that is why we call it percentual), and in which each political power has as much seats as is its percentage in the Parliament. This means that if a given Tandem (or party) is present, for example, with 75 mandates out of 200 people in sum, it will have 37.5%, which must be rounded to a whole number. There arises some problem when we are exactly on the middle, when we can do one of the following: either to give up to maintain the exact number 100 and round how is established; or to apply the "school" rule of rounding above (5
1
/
2
is taken for 6 — in Bulgaria this is the highest grade) by the small quotas, when by this diminish the maximal quotas (consecutively in decreasing order, for not to harm only one party) — anyway, this is not so significant. In this way we obtain by one number for each political power, which let us name
(candidates for President), and on this the first phase ended.
b)
The next phase is
shuffling of the Presidential pool
, what is needed in order to avoid clusterization by the choice, but first of all we have to order all party quotes (because here we have no successive numbers). This is performed when in the beginning give to each political power the needed number of places in some order, for example in alphabetical order of their initials (or their names) marking only this (say, from 1 to 15 — AAA, from 16 to 19 — BBB, and so on), and then draw a lot for
of all this transitional numbers without return until exhausting of the numbers (in accordance with what was said at the end of 2.1.c) ). This is how we get proportional random choice of the political colours.
c)
Then follows the phase of
choosing of the exact political power
, which we propose to be performed in one attractive way, drawing
at once the winning number but only its
, only that this time these are not the digits of the number from the previous phase, because they are only two, but first we take care to make them more, taking
! As far as this is something very easy (it is taught in schools in the high grades in mathematics or computer science) and will be, anyway, officially announced with the shuffled Presidential pool, there is no need to explain how its calculation is done, but we shall mark only that for this purpose
(i.e. 0 and 1) will suffice, and this even for up to 127 candidates. It is drawn
in similar way to the explained at the beginning of 2.1.c), via drawing of its digits in reversed order, or by using simultaneously seven spheres, only that here we will need 20 pairs of binary digits for to fill the spheres. When a number exceeding the whole number is drawn then the drawing is repeated. It is drawn only one number because we think that the President and Vice-president (as also one their possible replacement) must be from one and the same political power.
With this the choice for the traditional parties is finished, because each one of them has ready pair of persons. But let us stress again that the "colour" of the Presidential institution follows this of the governing (properly said, of the stronger represented) party /Tandem
(i.e. on the average for many elections), but in each particular case are possible (and normal) exceptions, according to what decides the "providence". So that the choice is both, reasonable, and the emotions are also big, or, as the folks say: "the wolf is satiated and the lamb is alive"!
d)
The last phase is
the choice of concrete persons
, where here also, similarly to 2.1.c), first is formed the list of candidates for President /Vice-president from the given Tandem, where we have to take care their number to be not less than 3-4 (here may be used in the same way the formula
, where
is the number of places in the Presidential pool for the country and plays the role of
), after what a lot for their ordering is drawn, where the first two persons are counted as chosen and the left are reserves. Here also, naturally, is applied the rule for withdrawal of the post and receiving of the half of the salary, in which case enters the first next reserve.
3. Future of the elections
After the transition to one general and full participation in the elections only of Tandems, as
next and
(or parts of the population with different interests), will occur also changes in the character of the exact elections. First of all there will be no need of general voting with bulletins of the candidates, pre-electoral promises and lies, electoral regions and sections, people for counting of the votes, defenders, etc., etc., because each one, who wants to take part in the elections will take care to register himself in some Tandem and in this way he, as a rule, will have made his choice
, and who has not done this then he does not want to vote. Insofar as many people will participate in several Tandems the total number of voters achieved by summing up of the members of the Tandems may exceed the real number of voters, but this isn't important because every elector has only one vote, and the proportionality in the number of members of the Tandems will be preserved. Simply may happen that one votes for one Tandem but may be elected via another one, but this isn't something bad (one may vote also for a foreign Tandem), but who will be registered in more places will increase his chances to be chosen.
All procedures of public drawing of numbers for forming of the lists of candidates, be it for MPs, be it for Municipal Counselors, be it for President, will remain, but they will be much more attractive than the traditional elections, will be at least ten times cheaper, and will be paid by the very electors so that they will cost nothing to the state! Even in the first entering of the Tandems in the elections for President already is absent the general (and mostly irrational) phase, where leaves only the drawing of the lot. Because the forming of Tandems can be done on very different principles: on regions or small neighbourhoods, on liking of different football teams, on possessions and wealth (they have
car, have just some vehicle, don't have a car), on sexes, on professions (of housewives, students, building workers, technical intellectuals, pensioners, etc.), and other variants, is possible wide variety of cases and very interesting electoral games.
Notwithstanding the fact that on this world one can rarely take only the good without the bad in our case will be saved all pluses of the democracy, and not only will not be present its minuses (the difficulty to find reasonable decision on the basis of the unreasonableness of the traditional elections; the deformity of presenting the population in the Parliament; the partiality and non-objectiveness of the party members, which features can hardly have place in the Tandems because they are temporary groups of people with common interests
of play and have no moral obligations to hide and diminish the errors of their people; no chance at all for 99.99% of the voters; etc.), but now arise new and obvious pluses, like: easy, attractive, cheap, and positively useful elections for forming of representative selection of all levels of the population, giving real chances to every participant to be chosen in the government of the country, where in this way, little by little, the unnecessary clamour of traditional elections will be replaced with the rational, merry, and interesting game, with the irreplaceable show of elections!
If the reasonable in the democratic elections is in their unreasonableness then the
Tandem for Total Totalization is the most reasonable choice
of the unreasonable, choice which (at last) returns the contemporary democracy to the source of Ancient Athens, where the uniformity of the selection was guarantied on generic principle (the co called "dems"), and in the genders often was drawn a lot, where we
at all the principle on which the Tandems will be formed. We require only, when the choice is difficult or impossible, to entrust it entirely to the Event, and to leave for us the emotions of the play, because what is our life if not one game? But this game must be
and accessible for everybody, not only for some privileged aristocratic, financial, ethnic, mafiotic, or some other hierarchy!
TTT not only brings us near to the ideal solution — TTT
!
If the democracy is chance for everybody, then
TTT is chance for the democracy
!
If the humanity can't do without democracy, then
the democracy can't do without totalization
!
To total democracy through the Tandem for Total Totalization!
— — — — —
MANIFESTO OF THE FFF
(Feminism Forcing Formation)
The history of all societies
is a history of
fight between the exceptional and the mediocre
! And in this fight very often wins the mediocre, because it is exactly
, it is this, what wide population masses want, and what they can understand and accept. The exceptional, on the other hand, is supported and understood only by a minority, and it isn't at all clear whether it is good or bad, until this question is not answered by the future (very often again
unanimous), because there are not objective criteria for this. In other words, there are no guarantees for disregarding of the mediocre majority in the name of some not known where leading minority! In the area of politics this means that
the ruling positions must be taken
, expressing most completely the aspirations of averaged folk layers, and "must" here means that if this is not so then these personalities simply will not stay for long on the political stage! This thesis surely is known, but till now it has not been explained convincingly. Only we from the
Feminism Forcing Formation
(FFF) have logically motivated meaning on this question which we express below.
1. Elections for central and municipal ruling institutions
Accepting as fundamental the above-mentioned
we propose the following phases.
1.1. Preliminary (pre-electoral) selection
of the candidates according to certain criteria fixed, naturally, in the Election Law. Here the question goes about parameters like: gender, material conditions, education, physical characteristics, et cetera, which we will list precisely below. We can't propose, alas, whatever intellectual selection, as long as (at least for the moment) it can't be objective, because if it is, still, difficult for one to show oneself more clever (more capable in a given aspect, generally speaking), then he can easily make himself sillier, so that we are taking the risk to introduce in the governmental structures many uncommonly capable persons (who have very good
to be mediocre), but future achievements of psychology will possibly help us in this connection. So, let us formulate one
filter for mediocrity
of the candidates as conditions which they must obligatory satisfy in order to apply for ruling posts, namely:
a) Women
— all candidates for ruling positions must be
only
women! It is obvious that from both sexes the women are most mediocre sex, if not for other reasons then because they are laden with the main task of propagating the gender, and God or Nature (strike through the redundant) would not have entrusted one exceptional individual with the major task of reproducing, having in mind that his exceptionality can after some time turn out to be wrong — in this most responsible case may be set only on the mediocre! Anyway, we think it is well known that by various parameters (strength, intellect, physical qualities, etc.) the women, as a rule, are mediocre, and that is why each exception of this rule
and attracts our attention. If till now the women have not taken their well-suited place in the politics this is only due to not understanding of the principle of mediocrity in the governing, and the main task of FFF is to overcome this irrational anomaly.
b) Personal income
in the amount of
more than one and less than three minimal monthly salaries
(MMS) for the last calendar year. This is one suitable and wide enough criterion for moderate earnings, which in this way remains always actual because the MMS is continually corrected.
c) Secondary, college, or tertiary
(but only one)
education.
The main reason for including the tertiary or university education here is the general tendency to devaluation of educational qualifications, what unavoidably leads to one "middle" high education. In this sense is possible after some time to argue for removing of the secondary education as already under the average level, but higher than one tertiary education, in any case, must not be allowed.
d) Age — from 35
(completed)
to 45
(uncompleted)
years
to the moment of election. This not only forms the middle of the average life span for the humans (around 80 years, at least for the women in Bulgaria), but such relatively narrow interval excludes the possibility for participation in more than three (and usually two) mandates, what is sufficiently important for the renovation of the ruling posts in every party.
e) Tallness — from 155 cm
(including)
to 165 cm
(excluding), measured barefooted to the day of election. This requirement, of course, is forced by the mediocrity of choice, but it corresponds also with commonly accepted aesthetical criteria.
f) Weight — from 55 kg
(including)
to 65 kg
(excluding), to the day of election — the reasons are the same. Here deserves to be mentioned that the height and weight have to be confirmed with official measurement by authoritative commission under conditions of general publicity from one to three days before the election, and those who don't meet the requirements drop out even in the last moment. There are meanings for imposing of the requirement this choice, which will be broadcast also by television, to be executed
for women-candidates, and we can't deny certain degree of reasonableness in this, for the people have the right to know as better as possible their chosen ladies, but for
we don't think this must be made obligatory. Similarly it isn't yet included selection on chest measurement (say, from 1.2 to 1.4 of the waist measurement), because in the age of mass applying of artificial feeding of babies, for one thing, and the great achievements of cosmetic medicine, for another thing, this isn't very indicative for the mediocrity. In any case, it is always possible to add some correction to the Election Law, if this proves to be needed later.
As we already mentioned these are requirements only for the candidates
in the country (MPs or Municipal Councilors) and don't impose changes in the party structures. It is not necessary
to come to the conclusion that in each party can enter only women, or that they have to be only between 55 and 65 kg, etc.; or also the vulgar understanding that each party member (no matter to which party belongs) must present himself (or herself) always naked to the waist on party gatherings — by unfavorable meteorological conditions this may turn to be harmful for the health! In other words, in each party can be, as well members men, also "memberesses", but only women answering to the above-mentioned requirements can set their candidatures for participation in the governing of the country. If these requirement will lead to gradual withdrawal of men from the politics (in the was in which the appearance of automobiles in their time has led to shifting aside the horse coaches from their positions of means for transportation) — well, good, we do
to this, we will welcome this, but we don't require it! If such time comes this means that this is the
of the things and it just has to be accepted.
1.2. Proper (actual) elections
for central and municipal organs of government. Proceeding from the principle of mediocrity in governing we think that it is necessary to cut out all possible cases when for one party (coalition) is obvious that it does not express the meaning of the middle of the population, i.e. from 1/4 to 1/2 of the electors. These situations are three, namely:
a) Low threshold
for participation — we propose
10%
of places in the Parliament (or Municipal Councils), because if one party can't gather at least as much percents then it in no case can express the interests of the average citizen and, hence, must drop out from the governing.
b) High threshold
for participation — we propose
60%
of places in the Parliament (or Municipalities), because if one party wins more that this it gets obvious supremacy in the institution and suppresses each opposition! In this case
the elections
, because this not only violates the principle of mediocrity, but also harms the foundations of democracy.
c) Correlational threshold
for participation — we have in mind the difference in the number of places between the first and second parties with most votes related to all places in the Parliament, in percents. If they are very near one to the other it can't be said which party is more mediocre, because the difference is within the limits of the error, where we think that this percent must be
at least three
, and if the difference is smaller, then again
the elections
(so, for example, by 100 persons in the Parliament, if the one party wins 37 of the places, and the other — whatever amount between 35 and 39 including, the elections are annulled). For the Municipalities, though, this threshold is
applied, mainly because of the small number of seats in them.
These requirements, by the way, are obvious, where the low threshold, in any case, exists in most of the Parliaments, the high one leads to dictatorship, and when the correlational is broken is arrived at the situation of "two hard stones", for which our people have long ago said that they can't "mill the flour". More important is to add that, as far as here we may often come to canceling of the elections, they are performed
up to three times
, after what (by not satisfying some of the conditions) the organs
remain
in their old staff
for another 6 months
, when elections are performed again.
As far as by the elections for Parliament are chosen, in fact, only women we have all reasons for naming it
, because this matches exactly the real situation; similarly the Municipal Councils become
. But let us explicitly stress that in Women's Assembly the women
, i.e. they approve or
, where the fabricating of the very law-bills is done in different Commissions to it, which are filled with good professionals (jurists), not with mediocre politicians, and in them, naturally, can take part also men (where this is even preferable). In this way the cherished desire of the woman to take decisions by propositions of the man, i.e. after he is already made all depending on the reason in order to reduce the things to ordinary choice between hardly discernible and
alternatives (something like the choice of necktie, for example), and what finds its manifestation in almost each family (and even more so in relations outside from the families), becomes reality also in the politics, and this on the highest possible level!
Or you think it is in vain what people say that the man is the one who must propose and the woman is the other who must decline (or accept, respectively); or also that the man is the "head" but the woman — the "neck"? Put it otherwise, it appears one natural separation of the process of elaboration and analysis of the laws, from one side, made by competent professionals, i.e. by exceptional personalities, from the process of taking the decision by the people, or some of their chosen in advance commonplace (i.e. middle-valued) representatives, from another one. So that there is no danger, as cynically profess some enemies of FFF, to close the ... man's toilets in Women's Assembly.
Nothing more different can be said about the Women's Councils, where the work is primarily administrative and, when so, even more fitted for fulfilling by the mediocre and
sex; as also that there can, again, be different groups of men, which must think more profoundly, or perform the creative or tactical work, if this needs to be done.
2. Presidential elections
Contrary to more of the expectations we propose here something
diametrically
, because the situation, in this case, is opposite! The Presidential institution is mainly consolidating and representative, inasmuch the President does not accept laws but
(as far as the laws and Women's Assembly allow him this). He must, figuratively speaking, tear off the women when they "catch one another by the hairs", must be man with authority, charm, charisma, emitting strength and power, man to whom each woman (or at least these from the Women's Assembly) would have wished to obey, and that is why
he is not allowed to be mediocre
! The phases here are similar.
2.1. Preliminary selection for President
From the said just now follows that the Presidential filter must be
filter for
, such that to find one patriarch, or "father of the nation", and the conditions to which he must answer are the following:
a) Man
, because only man President can balance sexually the governing of the country, only man President can pacify the Women's Assembly, only man can rule with strong fist, only man can declare or terminate wars, when this becomes inevitable! The left subsections, in fact, specify more precisely which must be this Man (with capital letter!).
b) Personal income of more than 4 MMS
for the last calendar year. The President should not be mediocre, and the poverty has never been respected (especially by women), so that there leaves for him only to be sufficiently wealthy.
c) Education — more than
(one)
tertiary
, where some doctorate is preferable.
d) Age — at least 55
(full)
years
, because otherwise he simply can't be named "patriarch". Let us remind you that similar requirement is applied in various countries, though most often undeclared.
e) Married and with at least two daughters
to the moment of election — it is entirely natural for a man who must deal with the whole Women's Assembly to show that he can deal with at least three women.
f) Tallness — more than 175 cm
(barefooted) — obvious requirement.
g) Weight — more than 75 kg
to the moment of election. Weighing (in swimming trunks) will be performed similarly from one to three days before the election day and will be shown by national television — the show has never interfered with the politics yet only has helped it!
2.2. Proper (actual) elections for President
As far as he will work mainly with the Women's Assembly we propose his choice to be performed via
indirect voting in Women's Assembly
(there are no problems for direct general election, but this will only make the procedure more expensive, without making it more reasonable or spectacular). The choice terminates either from the first time, if one of the candidates wins
at least 50%
of the votes; or (otherwise) are performed unlimited number of votings until will be gathered
at least 1/3
of the votes, where by this also
the difference between the first and second candidates is
.
In relation with the thesis
"The President — father of the nation"
is necessary to be given to him also decent rights, for example: he must be allowed to set tasks to Women's Assembly (what laws to accept and actualize) and to require reports for their execution; to have rights to punish and even dismiss from the post, when he decides, the Representatives from the Assembly or the Councils (where they are substituted with the next reserves from the list of the same political powers), but
not more than 1/3
of their number in each of these structures for one his mandate; to have
rights of veto
and by unlimited number of reviews (i.e. to be impossible to adopt whatever law if the President does not approve it, at least with his silence); to be Supreme Commander of the armed forces; et cetera. The supremacy of Women's Assembly may be shown only through changing of the President, but such extraordinary event may happen only after
taken
with qualified majority
(of 2/3) and in the interval of
at least one and not more than two weeks
between the votings.
3. Other elections
3.1. Elections of judicial authorities
Starting from the principle of mediocrity, because the applying of laws is even more routine task than their voting (and in a near future might even be assigned to some computerized systems), and if so it is entirely of the competence of women, the judges should have also be chosen in similar way as the Councilors. But on the other hand in the whole human history there are practically no cases of women as judges (neither in the old religious books such are mentioned), what is explainable with their extraordinary partiality and emotionality, leading to non-objectiveness in the appreciation of events, so that the women should have been entirely excluded from the judicial system (how it really was for a long time). Well, we propose one "Solomonic" decision satisfying both sides, namely:
the elections of judicial organs not
and to be performed according to the usual rules.
3.2. Elections of Government
Although the Ministers are not chosen in democratical way from the public, because they must be competent professionals and perform the tactical ruling of the country, we think it is necessary to mention the major requirements in this case. The Ministers is
to be men, but this may be left only as recommendation and be allowed to have also women for Ministers, because these posts are in sufficient extent
(if we think that the real tactician are
in the ministries), so that here also is applicable the "Solomonic" decision. These people must be proposed by the political powers, with right of veto from the part of the President, and only to be approved by Women's Assembly, but it has to be in position to reject or cease each of their decision, if finds it erroneous.
In Conclusion
deserves to be mentioned that the participation of women in the governing isn't something new, neither on a worldwide scale, nor in Bulgaria, and in the folklore of various nations finds its reflection the women's wisdom in solving of many difficult situations, it is spoken about "women's intuition" (as notion substituting the reason of men, and in many cases even more successfully), and so on, but till now all this has happened
, arbitrary, and ungrounded. Only
we from the FFF
for the first time propose logical motivation for this situation and
find the exact place of the woman in the governing
.
But by doing this, however, we
are
of woman — neither in the commonly proliferated in Bulgaria meaning of this movement as "equality", because there can't be spoken about equality where exists the biggest difference between individuals (between the sexes), nor in the right meaning of "freeing" (what is the exact meaning of the word) of the woman from the ruling of the man, because this ruling, very often, is
! Nor are we pleading for approving of the other extremity — the matriarchy, as ruling of the woman over the man, because men are already the
enduring sex and it remains only to take away their right to command, for them to loose at all the interest to live fulfilled life.
That is why we speak about
, understanding by this
between sexes, namely: the militant, creative, risky, exceptional — to the man, and the routine, mediocre, everyday needed, fateful for the posterity and the people — to the woman. Man proposes, woman disposes; man rules, but woman chooses (by whom to be ruled); or, otherwise said:
the Feminism Forcing Formation stresses on the extraordinary importance of the mediocrity of the woman,
!
The strength of the woman is in her weakness, the weakness of the man is in his strength,
the might of the FFF is in the
between the two extremities!
Without FFF there is no feminization, without feminization there is
in politics, without stability in politics the society has no future, ergo:
without FFF there is no future
!
Force the feminization with our Formation!
— — — — —
MANIFESTO OF THE CCC
*
(Civilized Centralization and Circuses)
[ * Here are three "z"-s in the original and this letter is also to the end of the alphabet (though not last). ]
The history of all societies
is a history of
compromise between the bread and the circuses
for the people! This is formulated most precisely in the proverbial phrase
, which we in Bulgaria translate not quite exactly as "bread and shows". For the securing of the bread is needed centralized, very often dictatorial or at least one-party, government, where for providing of the circuses for the people in the area of social governing is invented the democracy, or the choice from below, which gives possibilities for outspeaking of various parties and for changing of those who have sat for a long time on the throne. The truth in this case, as also in many other situations, is in the suitable level of
between these both extremities, because the good centralization requires full subjection of the population to the ruling persons, in order to achieve peaceful life in the country, as much as
the goal of each ruling in
, but nobody can obey sufficiently good if he has rights to criticize and change those who command him. On the other hand, only the possibility for participation of wide population masses in the governmental processes, the discussions and confrontations of different views, realized in the democratic forms of government, can provide the so needed for the public political circuses, which together with this ensure also quick and easy changing of the line of governing when needed.
As it's seen, these are contradictory requirements, and the contemporary democracy succeeds to remain for a long time in many countries because it
that classical democracy from Ancient Greece (which, because it was pure democracy, or has provided mainly the circuses, has not stayed for more than a decade in succession in Ancient Athens and was changed with the next tyranny). Despite of everything, however, the present-day compromising democratic forms of ruling, though they contain sprouts of strong centralized power, set primarily on the democracy, and for that reason the providing of bread continues to limp, where the more poor the country is, the more tangible people feel the need of really stable power, and not only of circuses. But in order to appreciate properly our proposition let us first have a look at the
1. Main shortcomings of the democracy.
1.1. The opposition and the folks hinder the rulers in the process of governing,
where they most often want things which, if they alone had to implement them into deeds, would have perfectly well understood their unjustification, and this, in turn, urges the leading party rare to give ear to their voices! This is psychologically well explainable, because one thinks in one way when he alone has to do this, what he proposes, and in entirely different way when he wants just to express his meaning but knows that,
, nobody will listen to him. That's exactly this that gives the circuses, of course, but these circuses hinder the governing when they cease to be just circuses and allow possibility for influence over the governing. After the moment when one party wins in the elections it must be left to govern alone; there might be given advises to it and expressed requests, but
that it will listen to them! And exactly then the ruling persons will listen more often to the circuses, because they may be interesting for them and the ruling ones may later say they were their own meanings (whether for the people is important to be well fed and the life be calm, not
exactly has proposed something reasonable).
The ruling party must take the whole responsibility
for its governing; it will have the possibility to listen to the voice of people when new elections come, but it should not be hindered during the mandate.
1.2. The rulers suppress the free expressions of the ruled,
because they are afraid (and with reason) that the people and the opposition will begin to search ways to interfere with the pursued line of management and even to change them prematurely. When somebody isn't convinced that the other one will listen to him and respect him, then he tries either to fool him or to disguise the facts, and when he can't achieve this, then the governing becomes ineffective and begins to stall. Similar situation may be seen in contemporary families, where, as far as the deciding parts are exactly two, is obviously necessary unambiguous determination of the deciding vote, and if it lacks (as it also happens nowadays) than the family begins to fall apart. Similar is the fate of many democratic regimes, especially of the so called bipolar model, when emerge "two sharp stones" for which the folks say that they "can't grind the flour", because the most often reaction is simply to do the reverse of what the other part wants (in order to see who is the stronger). If the rulers are convinced that nobody will hinder them to finish their mandates then they will try (at least the cleverer between them) to fulfill the wishes of the opposition and the folks, for to be again elected the next time. As it's seen, the simultaneous activity of the winners and the losers in the elections, on one and the same arena called Parliament, leads only to troubles, where neither the bread is good secured, nor the circuses are circuses.
1.3. The real democracy remains on the streets,
because in the majority of cases the main advantages of the democracy occur under the influence of various extra-parliamentary associations, were they: movements for environmental protection, for protection of animals, for freedom of homosexuality, some female squads, pacifist movements, associations of pensioners, or of certain minorities, and so on, as well as from a number of prominent individuals, or extraordinary set up temporary associations, but
as a result of debates in the Parliament. Not that the Parliament does not at all provide circuses for the people, but the real circuses happen on the streets, and even if we imagine that it is possible to satisfy all wishes of the masses, and before they are yet expressed, then there also will be discontented people, at least because they will have nothing
! Hence, all circuses must be gathered in one place, in one specially created institution, to which all who express a wish must have access, not only the official opposition from the Parliament.
1.4. In all Parliaments is absent the rule for two mandates of political parties,
which is important dynamical element in the present-day democracy. Such rule exists for the President, but he is only one person, where it does not exist for the parties alone, and in this situation some party may win the elections even in five mandates in succession, and the masses will be governed
, because nobody will give up his post voluntarily, if his party continues to lead. Under the democracy
, because if such existed it shouldn't have been changed (as it was under the totalitarian regimes), so that each prolongated remaining in power unavoidably strengthens the centralization, but decreases the spectacularity for the people. It is needed, therefore, some ceiling for the duration of governing of each party (coalition), what will lead to more frequent change also of the very politicians, because, as in the families, so in the politics, the variety is the primary thing which makes life bearable.
From the already said it becomes clear that the contemporary democracy is one
of centralization and circuses, in which nobody bothers to set some limits where the one thing ends and the another one begins, and for that reason the circuses hamper the governing and vice versa, and the democracy exists because it can't be a country without ruling and till now there was not known something that could have made it better. We from the
Civilized Centralization and Circuses
(CCC) undertake to correct this omission by offering
2. New democratic structures.
These structures are mainly two, which are pure incarnation of the two principles in the governing, where the first is called
2.1. Government.
This is the very government and there is no need to invent new names when this word is well known in the western languages (though in the other, not exactly "Eastern" ones, it is not used).
The Government
is the ruling body in the contemporary democracies, but together with the managerial functions of the Council of Ministers, which is part of the Government, here are included also the Municipalities, as regional governmental bodies, the
Legislative Chamber
, as analogue of the legislative functions of traditional Parliaments, as well as the Presidency, with representative and consolidating functions. These structures and their rights are established in accordance with the Constitution of the country, and their filling with concrete individuals is performed by decision of the
Representative Council
(RC) of the party which has won the elections. This Council consists of
100 persons Representatives of the People
(RPs or MPs) from the
in the elections party, which are estimated by summing of the voices only for the first party, dividing them by 100, and in this way is calculated the quota for one representative place in RC. Later, according to this quota, for each region is calculated a number equal to the amount of seats in RC for the region, where the votes for this party are divided to the quota. This number isn't integer and because of that firstly is chosen the minimal amount of MPs according to the integer part of this number and then all regions are ordered in decreasing order of the fractional part of the same number and is taken by one person from each region from the beginning of the list in this order until reaching the required common amount of hundred persons, what guaranties justified rounding in favour of the greatest parts. The choice from below reaches to the establishing of the political power and its representatives, from then on starts the reasonable choice from above according to the decision of this power.
The leading party determines the various Ministers, but they
so important persons as we are used to think and only
in the governing process, as says also the very word, which is derived from the root ... "mini-", surely, i.e. something small (where exactly in English the word "minister" means small priest, ambassador, and, in general, officer in some centralized structure; well, he isn't so small officer because there are even smaller,
to him persons, who administer). The Representative Council of the ruling party appoints also the members of the Legislative Chamber according to certain professional criteria, approves the Municipalities according to the party lists for the regions, as also chooses the President and Vice-president, and this is the supreme authority of the country after initiating of the mandate, which can perform whatever changes in the Government and to cease (reject) decisions of various of its bodies. This, naturally, does not mean that in the Government can't enter representatives of other parties or non-party persons, if they are good professionals, but RC is the instance, which has to approve them and takes its responsibility in case of eventual errors.
The Representative Council
permanent body and it chooses between its lines one
Coordinating Council
(CC) from 12 persons as permanently acting body and with rights to cause congregation of the whole RC when needed, as far as the major part of MPs from the ruling party occupy some posts in the Government. The adoption of laws is done in RC, where each draft law can be subjected to prior discussion. The sittings of the RC are carried out, as a rule, by closed doors, where the decisions are taken by simple or qualified majority (according to the case) and announced officially. The same applies also to various bodies of the Government. The mandate of the Government and the Representative Council is according to the written in the Constitution (where we find that 4 years is an appropriate duration) and it can't be prolonged, but can be terminated earlier by decision of RC taken with qualified majority of 2/3 of its members, and then must firstly be carrier out new elections in shortened terms (up to three months) and only after this to be handed over the power. The Representative Council can be called also by initiative of at least 1/4 of its members, but only it embodies the whole government and takes the whole responsibility. Any public debates hindering the governing are excluded from the Government, because it intentionally is separated from the circuses and the expression of will of the people, for which purpose exists another structure called
2.2. Circament.
As it follows from its name this is a structure for providing of democratic circuses to the people, for discussions and expression of the popular will. Our presumption is that
each
comparatively
mass movement
must have
, so that people could be in position to express themselves and their pretensions to be written and showed to the Government, if they receive positive resolution in some of the divisions of the Circament. This, of course,
that the Government must pay attention to them, but each non-paying attention may then fall on the back of the ruling party, so that exactly this is the needed degree of compromise and of dividing between governing and circuses. In order to be fairly represented all strata of the population the Circament consists of
, namely:
a)
House of the Representatives
(HR). This House is sufficiently near to the traditional Parliaments, or rather to their oppositional part, i.e. this is
the official opposition
, where it consists again of
100 persons
but
from
excluding the leading one (which occupies the Government), and in addition to this these parties have gathered enough votes for to skip over some lower threshold (what is also traditional requirement). This threshold according to CCC must be
five percent
from the votes for the Circament, what, in fact, corresponds to circa 3% by other Parliaments (because normally at least 1/3 of the MPs are from the first party, which here is absent). After throwing away those parties which do not skip the threshold are summed up the voices of these for HR and are divided similarly by 100 in order to find the quota of each of them, setting aside first the integer part, and after this the additions in diminishing order of the fractional parts. The specific Representatives are chosen according to the lists by regions, again first only the integer parts and after this also the additions for the decimal fractions. By the way, in this way is good to make also a list of
(continuing the visiting of fractional parts and, when needed, to begin again from the beginning), which to be used to supplement the HR if necessary.
b)
House of the Anti-representatives
(HA). This house is now a new element and
has
. It consists also of
100 persons
, where here are represented these political parties which have not gathered the needed number of votes to enter the HR, where here, too, exists
lower threshold of five percent
. The calculations are entirely similar to those in the previous subsection, where here are excluded all parties up to the last represented in the HR including, only that, as far as this House already is of the minority parties, then they are represented
, so that those with the fewest number of votes to be "heard" best of all. This is one typical circus element and it, positively, will provide many emotions for the people during the debates in this House. More precisely said, this inverse proportion means that after establishing of the exact number of mandates for the parties these mandates are read in strictly inverse order where the first party gets the number of Representatives of the last in HA and vice versa, the second — those of the last but one, et cetera.
c)
House of the Extra-parliamentarians
(HE). This House
also is entirely
and consists again of
100 persons
. In it enter
by three persons
from each of the
non-presented anywhere
else
political forces
from the participated in the elections, as well as
from each other organization
expressed a wish to be included (provided it is registered under the law for non-profit organizations), which can be represented in the moment. Let us make this clearer: because here can be represented at most 33 organizations this means that if they are more than this number is simply drawn a lot which of them may enter, where each force then names by three persons who are to represent it (first in the lists, if they have taken part in the elections), and in addition to this these persons choose one between them for Chairman (and to fill up the number to 100), where this force that has given the Chairman proposes one more on his place. It is maintained a
for including of new organizations, where
every six months
these forces
are updated
(and possibly is chosen new Chairman) substituting maximum ten forces (if there are at least so much in the queue), and the determining of those, that are to go out, as well as those, that are to enter, is performed in an arbitrary way — via a lot! This is quite justly because in HE are represented forces with practically no importance for the governing (but important for the
), and there are no other reasons for the greater value for democracy of the whichever one of them, where in this sense the ordering in the queue gives no priority for inclusion. Besides, each gone out force can
stand in the queue, by wish. And, naturally, if there are less than 33 such powers, then HE will be in incomplete number.
The House of Extra-parliamentarians solved satisfactorily also the question with individual candidates (IC), because they can easy register some non-profit associations (e.g. "Ivan Ivanov and Supporters") and just enroll on the waiting list, even if they
taken part in the elections, in which case they will have very real chances to be represented (and though by three persons) in the Circament, and for at least 6 months. But may be proposed an alternative variant of HE, in which it consists of up to 30 parties by 3 persons and up to 9 individual candidates, plus the Chairman, where there are maintained two separate waiting lists — for parties and for IC — and are changed by 10 parties and 3 IC. Though let us mark, that the presumption for individual candidates is rather one more democratic confusion, because they are chosen by regions, not for the entire country, where one known personality can much more easy collect the required number of votes. And besides, what's the purpose for one IC to win in three regions, foe example; or else, if he is chosen from the whole country, then to win, say, five mandates? Therefore, it is clear that they exist only for
the political power which stays behind them, so that CCC thinks that they must not exist, and the corresponding persons take part in the government, if they wish to, in some other (easier) way.
As you see,
the Circament is one perfect democratic circus
, where are represented: the traditional oppositional parties — in the House of Representatives —, also the typical minorities, which take part in the elections but can not succeed to enter in the classical Parliaments, and even maximally spectacular — in the House of Anti-representatives —, and in addition to this also all extra-parliamentarian forces, which are absent from the traditional Parliaments and go about the streets hoping to attract attention of the public and the government — in the House of Extra-parliamentarians. These Houses are ordered by seniority or importance (in the order of explaining), and every common person may require access to the Circament, but
and upwards, i.e. firstly to HE. If HE comes out with resolution that his opinion deserves attention, he may require access also to HA, and in the same way to HR. Surely each House may also deny access of this person, or reject his thesis as pointless or outdated. Similar is the way of corresponding of these Houses with the Government, where only HR has right of access to it, and this also not directly but via correspondence, to which, as we mentioned earlier, the Government is not at all obliged to pay attention. This is how the government can be Government, and the circuses — Circuses!
In the Addendum is given one detailed example for the distribution of seats in the above-mentioned democratic structures in accordance with the requirements of the CCC. Here it remained to look at one more structure, which takes temporary part in the governing and which is called
2.3. General Assembly.
The General Assembly
(GA) is called
in the beginning of each mandate
for
a period of
two weeks
, which can be prolonged twice for the same period. In timely executed elections GA can be gathered even one month before expiring of the mandate of the old Government. In it enter the 100 persons from the
Representative Council
of the leading party and also the 100 persons from the
House of Representatives
from the Circament. It can take decisions only about questions for changes in the Constitution leading to changes in the structure of democratic authorities, for possible corrections in the duration of the mandate with regard of rounding, but less than plus /minus one year, or for redistribution of certain authorities. All decisions of GA are taken with qualified majority of 2/3 and until it completes its work the old Government continues to work. In the normal case two weeks are just a period for making acquaintances between the future rulers, for analysis of the expiring governing, and for transmission of the work in the corresponding structures from one party to another. It is possible also to decide that GA will be gathered after one year again for two weeks in each six months, for analysis and reporting, where after the second year to have rights to decide about early termination of the mandate and fixing of new elections.
3. Democratic elections
The elections for the Government and the Circament are general, with bulletins and lists of candidates, as it is in the traditional democracies. The new moment here is the so called
, what means that if one party /coalition occupies twice in a row the Government and if it wins for the third time it receives only the right in one of
to move up with one position, while currently it
with one position back and is considered as second power in which case it receives stable majority in HR of the Circament! This moving up in the next elections, surely, is worthwhile only from second place to first, because this ranking can not change the percentage of votes for the party and, hence, this shows no influence over the HR, but it can be very significant sometimes, when the party lacks a mere percent to the first place. This postponed mandate is one very justified decision that satisfies the requirement for maximum two mandates for each party and in the same time it harms nobody else, but if instead of party we have coalition then this rule is applied to the
, so that if to the next elections even one political force comes out of it, then all left forces also lose their postponed mandate. In addition let us mention also that, as far as this condition remains valid only up to two consecutive elections, and is won also for two mandates, there is no possibility for more than one party /coalition to make use of it simultaneously.
Because the Municipalities are part of the Government there is no need for additional elections for them, and, besides, they are administrative units, or should have been such ones. If our country was divided in autonomous regions or States, with some separate territorial bodies and laws, then it could have been allowed in each State to perform also elections for local governmental bodies, but for us there's no need for this. The separation of the Legislative Chamber as professional judicial body for making of laws solves also the question with
of the political leaders, because the one who governs is not at all needed to know how to compose laws. The drafts of the laws are elaborated in the Chamber and are adopted by the RC of the Government, what does not exclude (and even presupposes) the possibility that the House of Representatives from the Circament expresses its meaning about each of the drafts, if RC or CC decides to send them with this purpose. HR, for its part, can decide to make other Houses also know this draft law, but the Circament takes no decisions and works under directions from the Government and in set by the later terms. The choice of the President ceases to be the next circus for the masses because his post is especially important for the state, and his professional qualities can be appreciated best of all by his colleagues from the party which leads the Government, and that is why he is chosen by the Representative Council of the winning party. In this way is excluded the possibility for existence of President from oppositional party, what can only weaken given government and force new elections.
As a rule CCC proposes that
all mandates begin on Jan 01 of an year divisible by 4
, where the elections are held three months before this time (i.e. in October), and even the General Assembly to be called in the beginning of December. The pre-electoral campaign begins normally 6 months before each elections (or from April 01) and each temporary ban on political parties, if such was imposed by the Government, is canceled in order that the elections run fairly, and later the next Government can again enact such ban, if finds it necessary, but only with resolution of Representative Council taken with qualified majority. Even in situation of martial law, or under premature termination of the mandate (again by decision of RC), the elections must be held normally, where in such conditions is allowed the pre-electoral period to be shortened, but not to less than three months.
Martial law can declare initially only the President but for a period of to 14 days, which can be prolonged ones more time. In case of military danger or serious internal turmoils RC has the right to prolong this condition also to the end of the mandate (i.e. after the elections and until the new Government takes the power). Anyway, all these things must be fixed in the Constitution of the country, by respecting the main ideas of CCC. It is right also to fix the remuneration of different structures where we propose the following gradation: HE of the Circament to receive only by one minimal monthly salary (MMS) in a month, HA — by 2 MMS, HR — by 3 MMS, and the staff of the Government and RC — from 4 to 7 MMS.
The Civilized Centralization resembles in some extent the known democratic centralism, only that under the latter there was only centralism and was no real democracy, because there were no party fights and genuine elections. By our proposition exists as well strong central power (which can forbid temporarily political parties, demonstrations, and other manifestations of public discontent leading to unrests in the country), as also real free democratic elections, where in the Circament are represented not only the parties won in the elections but also
other parties and strata of the population. Of course,
for interference in the governing of the country, but that is, after all, why the elections are performed — for to determine which political party what rights will have during the next mandate! And the rule for postponed mandate is just a necessity for all democratic forms, only that it is applied nowhere yet.
If we want adaptive and dynamic governing we must choose some form of democracy; if we want stable and dynamic democracy we must choose some way for centralization; if we want circuses and emotions for the people we must give them possibility for free manifestation and circuses.
The Civilized Centralization and Circuses satisfies all these requirements
.
CCC preserves everything precious from the democracy
, centralizing and strengthening it, but in one civilized, not totalitarian, way. The civilized society requires civilized democracy, but
the civilized democracy is the CCC
.
The democracy incessantly develops and betters itself, or mutates and evolves.
The newest mutation in the domain of democracy is the CCC
.
If you value the circuses, if you value the centralization,
if you value the civilization,
then
you value the Civilized Centralization and Circuses!
— — —
ADDENDUM TO CCC
This Addendum contains one exemplary distribution of the quotas according to the votes of the electors. Let us have the following results of the voting of exactly 6 mln participants (given in thousands) and 27 parties, what is near to the real situation for our country.
Parties P01 P02 P03 P04 P05 P06 P07 P08 P09 Votes (ths) 2,076 1,843 615 442 338 251 124 72.3 53.4 Total percent 34.6 30.72 10.25 7.37 5.63 4.18 2.07 1.21 0.89 Circament % —- 46.97 15.67 11.26 8.61 6.4 3.16 1.843 1.361 Enter in HR % —- 52.82 17.63 12.67 9.69 7.19 —- —- —- HR mandates —- 53 17 13 10 7 —- —- —-
Parties P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 P17 P18 Votes (ths) 41.32 32.43 27.37 22.36 17.42 13.58 10.62 7.122 5.481 Total percent 0.689 0.541 0.456 0.373 0.290 0.226 0.177 0.119 0.091 Circament % 1.053 0.826 0.698 0.570 0.444 0.346 0.271 0.181 0.158
Parties P19 P20 P21 P22 P23 P24 P25 P26 P27 Votes (ths) 3.125 1.281 .847 .638 .594 .425 .351 .213 .123 Total percent 0.052 0.021 0.014 0.011 0.010 0.007 0.006 0.004 0.002 Circament % 0.080 0.033 0.022 0.016 0.015 0.011 0.009 0.005 0.004
TAB.1. DISTRIBUTION OF THE QUOTAS BY PARTIES.
As it is seen from the above-given table for the Government have voted 2,076,000 voters, what by 100 seats in the Representative Council gives the quota of 20,760 people for one seat, where the concrete persons are chosen according to the lists by regions with the corresponding additions for the rounding. Then for the Circament remain other 3,924,000 votes with the shown percents of the voted for the parties on the 4-th row, where in the House of Representatives enter only those from P02 to P06. In this situation their percentages are recalculated (on the 5-th row) on the basis of the sum of voices for them, which are 3,489,000, what divided by 100 seats gives quota of 34,890 voices for one person from the HR.
Then we continue with the left parties for to establish the mandates also for the House of Anti-representatives according to the following table.
Parties P07 P08 P09 P10 P11 P12 P13 P14 P15 P16 Votes (ths) 124.0 72.3 53.4 41.32 32.43 27.37 22.36 17.42 13.58 10.62 HA + HE % 28.51 16.62 12.28 9.499 7.455 6.292 5.14 4.005 3.122 2.441 Enter in HA % 33.23 19.37 14.31 11.07 8.69 7.334 5.992 —- —- —- HA dir. mand. 33 20 14 11 9 7 6 —- —- —- HA inv. mand. 6 7 9 11 14 20 33 —- —- —-
Parties P17 P18 P19 P20 P21 P22 P23 P24 P25 P26 P27 Votes (ths) 7.122 5.481 3.125 1.281 .847 .638 .594 .425 .351 .213 .123 HA+HE % 1.637 1.26 0.718 0.294 0.195 0.147 0.137 .098 .081 .049 .028
TAB. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF THE LEFT PARTIES.
The calculations are similar, where for the HA + HE remain 435,000 votes and the parties from P14 and further drop out from the HA, what fives only 373,180, or divided again by 100 makes quota of 3,732 votes. The distribution of the of the final inverse mandates is seen on the last row of the first part of the table.
The left 14 parties enter in the House of Extra-parliamentarians composed by three persons from each of them, in which case there can be included also other political powers. By the real results for Bulgaria for the elections in 1994 took part even 47 parties, what would have exactly filled the HE, if was voted according to this proposition.
— — — — —
Сконвертировано и опубликовано на http://SamoLit.com/