TDG's Humanistic Clauses

All TDGs will be writing their own local constitution. This writing and working collaboratively gives them important experience in TDG governance. This experience will build a stronger foundation for later.

I have a few recommendations. One recommendation is putting in two humanistic clauses into their constitution. Here they are:

1) Our local TDG believes in the equality of the races.

2) Our local TDG believes in the equality of men and women.

I’m not recommending these clauses to advance these causes. These causes already have lots of champions.

Rather I’m recommending that these clauses be put in the local constitutions to keep a toxic attitude away from the early TDG.

If a citizen is harboring such inequality as part of his or her identity, that person is also likely harboring a non-collaborative approach to decision making. They have a “my-way-or-the-highway” attitude. They will raise enough ruckus to get more reasonable people to quit the TDG. This leaves errant thinking to run the local TDG, which I don’t think will run much longer.

The TDG is looking for people who have (or want to have) a consultative, collaborative, and consensual mindset. They will have a more gentle approach to democracy. But they need practice with this gentle approach. Current forums of politics are not gentle.

If the “inequality thinking” is removed from the early TDG, the early TDG builders will not be encumbered with trying to deal with a toxic attitude. Without less toxicity in the foreground, the builders will enhance their skills for consultation, collaboration, and consensus.

As the TDG gains experience, the early TDG will evolve into the middle TDG. The middle TDG will have more institutional strength to handle new TDG members who may have a toxic attitude. The leaders of that middle TDG will have more skills to face the toxic challenge. When the middle TDG reaches the maturing TDG, it will face any toxic challenge with wisdom, logic, love, and kindness.

More than two humanistic clauses?

I recognize that many early TDG builders will want to add more humanistic clauses to their TDG constitution. And I would say that many of these clauses would be worthy.

For example, I am an advocate for Universal Basic Income. If we put such a humanistic clause in the TDG constitution, those citizens suspicious of “socialism” will too quickly disregard the TDG. They are less likely to give the TDG a fair hearing; they are less likely to join later; they are more likely to join the opposition to the TDG. In other words, making the TDG a vehicle for our favorite progressive clause will alienate many capable citizens we want to bring in later.

Some people with anti-socialist sentiments just might be good early TDG builders. They just might be more accepting of socialist thinking later — if they are working alongside with such thinkers in building the TDG. Or maybe they have insights that can convince us their way is better.

Rather, I recommend that the early TDG builders just focus on setting up the rules for governing ourselves — and have confidence that the TDG will eventually and properly address the intent of the many well meaning progressive causes.

Right now, let’s focus on keeping the more toxic attitudes away from the early TDG. The two above humanistic clauses should provide much of that protection.

We can deal with toxic attitudes later — after we strengthen our TDG mindset and our TDG institutions. And we will eventually win many people over to our way of thinking. There will be fewer people with a toxic attitude.

Remember, the two humanistic clauses are just my recommendation. If a new TDG wants to remove the two humanistic clauses or add another five, I would not argue with their consensus. We will learn something new if a few TDGs go in these directions.

The TDG is so Granulated

Why is 200 is better than 40,000 or 100,000 or 500,000?

I had a Medium chat with one of my lukewarm fans. PlainTalkBadManners (PTBM) has read a significant part of my TDG work. Alas, I have not been able to convince her to invest some of her spare time into the TDG.

She told me she worked for the Labour Party in the last UK election. I anticipate that she will eventually be disappointed with that party as it tries to govern. I hope that she will realize that her time would have been better utilized building the TDG. I must be patient.

But I digressed before this essay started. Here is the reason for this essay. In PTBM’s communication, she offered this insight into her understanding of the TDG:

Even though lobbying and campaigning isn’t part of the TDG system, sociopathic opportunists and bad actors would nonetheless use it to gain power. I imagine it would be yet another vehicle for those with political ideology to exploit.

There’s a lot to unpack here. Providing a quick answer to PTBM’s response probably won’t suffice. So I turned my response to a full essay — and put it where more people will find it.

Granulated?

First I should explain “granulated” a little better. In my part of the world (rural southeastern Alberta), I live in a provincial constituency of 40,000 people and in a federal constituency of 100,000.

I have written about the Dunbar number. Basically most of us can keep reliable social connections with only 150 people at a time. These are the people “we know.” People outside our Dunbar group, we don’t know that well.

So when my current ballot proffers five or so people — chances are these people are not in my Dunbar group. After all, 150 in 40,000 is only 0.4%. So I will likely not know much about these names, except for their party affiliation.

Since I became apolitical (not favoring any political party), I’ve gone through about 20 provincial and federal elections. In only three of these elections, I knew something about one person on the ballot. And that understanding came from people in my Dunbar group who knew one of the candidates, kind of in a Dunbar way. So my perspectives were not from seeing the candidates with my own eyes. For the rest of my elections, I really had no information to base my vote on good character and capacity for governance. I usually spoil my ballot.

Ballots in western democracy are set up to vote for party affiliation. Most voters have no other criteria to base their vote. Which justifies political parties. Which is good for the political parties. Which, heaven forbid, we just can’t have another way of voting!

The TDG Way

When the TDG came to me, it was like a eureka you hear of scientists having. The answer comes so quickly. Many insights into the current and a new way of governance tumbled into me in a few minutes. While everything was jumbled as the TDG poured into me, something said, “Dave, set up electoral districts of 200 voters.” And that number has stuck with me ever since.

A few years later, I learned about the Dunbar number. The number “150” is really not that far from “200.”

Two hundred is much more “granulated” than my 40,000 provincial and 100,000 federal numbers. As I mentioned earlier, I seldom know much about any of the names on those ballots.

Admittedly, I would not know much about most of my 200 TDG neighbors. But I would likely know about 20 of them. On voting day, I would figure out which of them best fits with my definition of good character and capacity for governance, and cast my vote toward that person. This would be more satisfying for me than voting for people I don’t know.

Any of my 200 neighbors who gets 30 votes or more has proven a good rapport with some of the neighbors. If four neighbors reach this threshold, maybe all four would be a capable neighborhood representative. The TDG election may not put my preference in place, but it will still select one from “among the best.” We should be happy with that result.

Nefarious characters

Let’s go back to PTBM’s original comment. She mentioned “sociopathic opportunists and bad actors.”

Nearly all of us would agree that western democracy allows too many of these people into governance. My treatise is that the large electoral districts allow these people to hide behind party banners. When the voters vote for party affiliation, these flaws are either unknown or cast as unimportant. So the sociopathic opportunists and bad actors move into the legislature, giving their negative effect to the legislative process.

One “rule” of the TDG is that there is no electioneering in TDG elections. But it won’t really be a rule. Rather it will become part of the TDG culture, built by conscious application of the early TDG builders. They will educate voters not to vote for a neighbor who appears to be campaigning for a TDG job. So campaigners will find fewer votes than the capable non-campaigners. There will be little point to campaigning.

Rather the neighborhood representatives will earn their votes by the rapport they have developed in their community — long before they were first elected.

Most neighborhood TDGs will find a capable representative. But a few sociopathic opportunists and bad actors will find their way into that first tier. When they get their position, they will be much more visible to their TDG neighborhood. They will show more of their flaws. It is doubtful that they will be elected in the next TDG election, which is only one year away. In other words, the TDG neighborhood is not stuck with a such a representative for too long. It will vote better next time.

Here’s another check-and-balance. The first-tier representative really does not have as much “status, influence, and power” as my provincial and federal representatives have. Rather the TDG representative will be a conduit between the higher tiers and the neighbors. The position will likely be volunteer, maybe consuming 20 hours a month. Ambitious people — like sociopathic opportunists and bad actors — will not like this TDG position. For them, it is much easier to climb the party ladder than to gain a higher position in the TDG.
The Second Tier

And here’s another check-and-balance. About four to 12 neighhborhoods will be gathered into a district. They will be meeting once a month to discuss affairs of the district and make decisions within their jurisdiction. Six months after the first-tier election, the neighborhood representatives will convene to elect, from amongst themselves, the district representative. This person will move into the next tier.

Because these neighborhood representatives have sat in the same meetings, they will get a sense for each other, kind of in a Dunbar way. Traits of sociopathic opportunism and bad acting will become better known to all the neighborhood representatives. They will be casting votes toward the more capable of themselves to move higher.

It is more unlikely a sociopathic opportunist or bad actor will be elected into the second tier.

Just try to imagine how someone like Donald Trump can move up the tiers.

Yeah, but Dave . . .

. . . most of us can not vote for that district representative.

So true. The TDG is structured around tiered, indirect elections. As a former political junkie, I understand how disconcerting not being able to vote for the top dogs must be. It seems the TDG means losing control of who governs us. Let me offer these insights:

1) My question would be “How is the current system working for us?” If you don’t like the sociopathic opportunists and bad actors in our legislatures, then we should look at a new way of electing our representatives, right? Remember, the political parties have proven not to be good filters.

2) Most people do not take their politics as seriously as the political junkies. Most people would be just as happy voting for a good neighbor, giving that neighbor their voting privilege in the higher tiers. The political junkies, a minority, should not be defining the rules to suit their quest for political drama.

3) When we see capable people moving higher in TDG governance — not sociopathic opportunists and bad actors — should not the political junkies just accept this new way as better?

Conclusion

Reducing electoral districts from 40,000 to 200 people will create a much different dynamic between the people and their governors. There won’t be many sociopathic opportunists and bad actors in TDG governance. When they do find a way in, they will likely be tossed out. They just won’t rise that high.

All because the voters know something about the people they are voting for.

Statistics, the TDG, and the Consultancy

In a recent previous article, I analyzed household incomes in Alberta with some primitive statistical tools.

My inspiration was that the Alberta government was using even more primitive tools to placate its own voting base that their economic life is getting better, when it is probably not.

You’ve probably heard this common phrase before: “There are lies. There are damn lies. Then there are statistics.”

While this phrase demeans the science of statistics (which is a subset of mathematics), there is a good reason for this axiom. Far too often, practitioners of statistics use statistics to bend the data to the conclusion the practitioners had before they got the data. One big reason for using statistics incorrectly is that our society has a certain level of dishonesty. Such practitioners are manipulating data more to maintain their career than to provide a good perspective for the world to move forward. When a few too many experts use statistics in this way, it degrades the whole science of statistics.

So when a certain conclusion was reached because of statistics, it becomes easier for those with opposing opinions to attack the concept of statistics, rather than whether the statistics were properly employed or not.

In other words, western democracy will throw aside statistics when it is politically inconvenient. Those with authority will just sell their version of the world to a public that has fewer skills in statistics than I have. And I only have a “learner’s permit.”

My Learner’s Permit

When I was taking my university statistics course, I remember using a mathematical template to analyze data sets of normal distributions.

Then my professor taught us how to convert the normal distribution into a t-test and a chi-squared test. I never really understood why we used one test over the other. When writing my statistics exam, I guessed on which of these two methods is appropriate. That is probably a good reason why my mark was a minimal pass.

We were also introduced to left- and right-skewed distributions. But the math behind these distributions was much more complex than normal distributions. So any rigorous analyses of these distributions was left to a higher-level statistics course — which I did not take.

Statistics is a wonderful science. But too often, it is too easily cast aside when it doesn’t fit a political agenda.

The Consultancy

Chapter 8 of my TDG book deals with options for the TDG. One of those options is “The Consultancy,” where the TDG acquires a pool of credible experts in various fields. The main objective of The Consultancy is not to find the expert of the experts, but to collate the findings of many experts. The elected TDG representatives will not have time and energy to for this kind of investigation, so it will rely on The Consultancy.

The Consultancy should employ professional statisticians. These people should overlook the workings of the other experts — scientific, economic, humanistic fields, et al — to ensure statistics have been applied in a proper way. In essence, these experts will vet the experiments that are leading to better public policy.

Nearly all professions have some subjectivity on proper ways to conduct that profession. For example, there are two kinds of dentists. The first kind like to fix every small thing. The second kind like to wait until some things get a little bigger. Both approaches have their pros and cons — and both approaches can keep our dental health in a good place. In a like manner, we should expect statisticians to have different preferred ways to analyze the same data.

So I would expect the statisticians working for The Consultancy to know of the various accepted statistical approaches. To make their report, they could apply these different approaches. Sometimes the approaches would agree with each other. This should allow the TDG to make its decision with more certainty. Sometimes the approaches would produce different conclusions. The TDG should know about this difference, and the decision would reflect more uncertainty.

And as the TDG representatives gain some experience with the expert statisticians, the elected representatives will gain a sense of the statisticians who are better at analyzing the numbers objectively rather than promoting their biases.

It should be noted that the elected TDG bodies are not obligated to use the recommendations of The Consultancy. Rather, The Consultancy will allow the bodies to see a bigger picture with statistics to make a better decision.

Conclusion

Today’s democracies have an unreliable relationship with statisticians.

In TDG governance, statistics will be better employed to find the better solutions.

Building the TDG Culture

When the people chose to replace their governing political party after a democratic election, that party and its leaders step aside for the victors to assume responsibility and authority for governance. I consider this willingness to lose power as the best sign of a functioning democracy.

History tells us this is not normal behavior. Rather, the historical norm is for leaders to hold on to power for as long as possible. Usually, forces bigger than elections were required to remove political leaders from their lofty positions.

So we should consider this “stepping aside” as a trait humanity had to learn. It did not come naturally to us, especially the political leaders. Somehow, we surpassed our natural instincts when we signed on to western democracy.

My alternative democracy—Tiered Democratic Governance(TDG)—will also require us to go beyond our natural instincts. As you are reading the traits necessary for the TDG, you might be inclined to believe these traits are insurmountable. But remember that we have overcome many of our baser instincts with western democracy. We can take this challenge to a higher level with the TDG.

Voting for Good Character and Competence for Governance

Today’s voters have all sorts of reasons for the way they vote. For the TDG to work, most of these reasons will have to be cast aside.

So the TDG has to train voters to vote more wisely. Voters need to be reminded to vote for good character and capacity for governance. This training comes with education and patience. It might take three or four elections for many new TDG voters to fully understand their role in identifying these two criteria and casting their votes accordingly.

As well, TDG voters will need to be watchful for campaigning—and not vote for the campaigners. The best way to discourage campaigning—which later forms factions which later forms political parties—is to not vote for campaigners. Let the past deeds of viable contenders earn the votes rather than promises for the future.

Decision-Making by Consultation

Western democracy has taught us to fight to implement our ideas. So we fight. We are not so much interested in what the other side is saying; we just need to shout longer and louder and take whatever other advantage we can find to get our agenda pushed through.

I have served on community boards. It takes me about six meetings to determine whether a fellow board member is truly interested in what I have to say or is only being nice to me while playing the game of democracy to implement his/her preordained agenda. This latter case applies to someone who is not of a consultative mindset, even if that person is civil and abides by the rules of democracy.

If we are of a consultative mindset, we are looking at our fellow decision makers as people who have acquired knowledge, experience, and wisdom we don’t have. By combining our knowledge, experience, and wisdom with theirs, we can reach better decisions than working by ourselves.

The TDG needs to make consultation a cultural trait. All decision makers should come with an open mind and a willingness to listen to others.

Many TDG voters will put “consultation skills” as one of their features for “capacity for governance” to cast their vote.

Respect for the Elected Bodies

Sometimes, TDG members may not like a decision made by the elected bodies of the TDG. But they should realize the source of these decisions. First, the TDG will have found people “from among the best”—in terms of good character and capacity for governance. Second, the members should realize that these decision makers are employing consultation to reach decisions, not playing partisan games. Third, these elected bodies have more information to reach those decisions. With all these TDG features brought together, the members should acknowledge these elected bodies are probably making better decisions than any individual can concoct in isolation.

When a TDG member disagrees with a TDG decision, the culture should bring that person into thinking something like:

“I don’t understand why our executive committee went this way. Maybe there are good reasons. If their decision is proven wrong, I’m sure they will fix it.”

Respect for the Advisors

Advisors are an integral arm of the TDG. They are appointed by the highest tier and should have several years of experience on the elected side. Advisors do not have any official power in the TDG, but whatever they say should be taken seriously by the elected decision makers. Often, a good advisor’s comments can take the elected side to a new understanding of an issue.

The TDG should have a culture that respects the advice when the advisor speaks. Just listen carefully. This person has a unique perspective because of the experience and position.

The Indirect Elections

If there is more than one tier, TDG members will not be voting for members of the higher tier(s). There are some good reasons for the indirect elections.

While the political junkies will rail at not being able to vote for the people in the higher tiers, I think many TDG members will be accepting of the indirect elections. Especially when the leadership of the TDG proves to be quite sound.

TDG Representatives Stepping Aside

Serving on the TDG will be an enjoyable experience for many elected TDG representatives. Some would prefer to continue in this service for as long as possible.

But the annual TDG election has its ways of moving people in and out of elected office. If a long-serving TDG representative is no longer elected, he/she needs to be thinking: “The TDG has found someone better than me to serve. I could use the break. And maybe my TDG experience will be used in other ways.”

A Deliberate Cultural Shift

The TDG requires a deliberate building of a new culture. This responsibility belongs to the early TDG builders and first TDG executive committees. The foresight and wise efforts in these early times will last for centuries. History will mention these early builders.

This TDG culture will not be easy to implement. We still have too many conflictive ways to overcome as we build this new culture. So there will be a few internal battles within each of us.

But as we improve, those watching the TDG will see our improvement. The TDG culture will become more ingrained, and it will be more easily passed down to new members and young members. They won’t have to overcome that internal conflict that has come from western democracy.

In 20 years, this TDG culture will almost be automatic. The new ways will be cultural, not forced.

Let me say this again. The early TDG is about establishing a new culture of decision making. We can elevate ourselves to this higher level of being human.

Building a Local TDG

Building a local TDG (Tiered Democratic Governance) won’t be that difficult!

Here are the requirements:

1. Recognize the Crumbling!

A few years back, I was stuck in traffic in a taxi in Montreal. We were close to a highway overpass. The taxi was not moving. I was looking around. I could see the crumbling concrete of the overpass. Concrete chunks missing; rebar was exposed; rainwater had free access to the interior of the concrete. If there was no repair coming soon, this overpass was going to collapse, probably sometime in the next 10 years. No amount of hoping and wishing was going to change that outcome. I mentally chastised the municipal engineers and/or municipal government for allowing the overpass to get to this state of disrepair. That overpass may not have been repairable.

If you believe the western democracy can be fixed, stop reading. If you believe there is a political messiah who will arise to change society to your liking, stop reading. Keep doing what you are doing. Do not look for any new way.

But if you sense western democracy has crumbled past the point of a few simple repairs, then changing to the TDG is all in your hands.

2. Read the TDG Books

The TDG essay is a nice 15-minute read. But it doesn’t explain the TDG well enough to show you how the various pieces of the TDG work together. My book is a three-hour read from the TDG website.

As well, I have three TDG novels that tell the story of the early TDG builders. Less technical but more inspiring than the TDG book. Yes, ordinary people can build the TDG!

3. Invest 10 Hours a Month

The usual path to entering a political career usually involves substantial lifestyle changes. Even as an active party member in the back rooms, I had to make life adjustments to get my party work done. My party efforts were far greater than what an early TDG would ever require of me. I often wonder if I had paid more attention to my business than politics, would my business have been successful.

The early TDG will require only about 10 hours a month. That’s about three movies or sporting events a month. I’m sure you can afford this sacrifice.

4. Talk with Your Neighbors

To build this local TDG, you are going to have to associate with your neighbors. This has become difficult for many westerners as we have built communities away from our neighborhood. Cheap gasoline and the internet have made it easier to find people more like us. Cheap entertainment is distracting us from being in a community.

The TDG will require people to practice working with people who are not like us. So your neighbors have become a good source to get this practice.

Imagine yourself having this conversation with your neighbor:

You: I’m not sure where our country is going these days. Politics is so vile and vicious

Neighbor: Yeah, you are right. It seems the politicians are powerless.

You: Well, there is a fellow from Canada who has written a book on a new democracy. He has given us a new blueprint.

Neighbor: Sounds nice, but those in power don’t want any new democracy.

You: This fellow says we should just start building it. He says we only need to gather a few neighbors to start building our local version.

Neighbor: What are we supposed to do?

You: He wants us to write our own local constitution. . . . . Are you interested?

Neighbor: Maybe.

You: I’m having a little meeting at my place on Thursday at 7:00. I’ll try to explain this new system as best I can. There’re a few things I don’t understand yet.

I’m sure you can have that conversation with a few your neighbors. Make your home available to these early TDG meetings. See what happens.

5. Start Now

The good news is that you won’t need many of your neighbors to come to your meeting. Four neighbors should be sufficient to start writing your own TDG constitution. For sure, 15 will be too many.

You won’t need permission from the political elite to start building your local TDG.

You won’t need permission from the wealthy to start building your local TDG.

You won’t need permission from the academics to start building your local TDG.

You won’t need permission from 50% + 1 of your neighbors to start building your local TDG.

You won’t need permission from the police or any other government agency to start building your local TDG.

You can start building today!

6. Call to Action

Talk to your neighbors.

Spend 10 hours a month to change the world!

Start building.

TDG Executive & TDG Members

Each TDG will be governed by a written constitution. This constitution sets out the various electoral rules for the executive committee. These elections will be held every year.

The executive committee will be communicating with the members about the date, time, place, and method of voting. And there might a reminder for members to be wary of campaigning—and not to vote for a member who seems to be campaigning. The members of the executive committee should be good examples of the no-campaigning culture. While their office has given them a higher profile in the community, they should meekly rely on their past work to keep them in that office.

As well, the executive committee should be reminding members to define what constitutes good character and capacity for governance and then cast vote to the neighbor that best defines those characteristics.

All TDG members residing in the TDG are eligible to be voted for. Voters write in the name(s) of their preference on a ballot.

The votes are counted. Based on the vote tallies, the local TDG constitution determines the members of the executive committee.

The executive committee will have almost full control of the affairs of the TDG until the next election. The only things they cannot do are: 1) amend their local TDG constitution and 2) merge with an adjacent TDG. The executive committee can set up the processes for these actions to happen, but these actions will require a majority vote from the membership at a specially called meeting.

The executive committee will assign officers and sub-committees as it sees fit.

The TDG constitution recommends that executive committee members strive for a unanimous decision on all their matters. If the members are in a good consultative mindset, this should happen quite often. If not, a majority vote shall prevail, with the minority backing the majority decision. If too many votes are required, more study of consultation is probably in order.

How will the executive committee find this consultative nature? Well, it goes back to the elections.

Let’s imagine this voting result in a particular TDG neighborhood. Barney gets 25 votes, Betty gets 17 votes, Wilma gets 32 votes, and Fred gets 16 votes. Three other neighbors get three votes each. The four highest votes are people who have built rapport with some of their neighbors. These four people are likely to be of a consultative mindset. In essence, the TDG election picked “from among the best.” Wilma, with her 32 votes, became the neighborhood representative.

But what if Wilma is not of a consultative mindset? In the next year, Wilma will have a higher profile in the neighborhood. If she is showing an arrogant attitude, some of the neighbors who voted for her will cast their vote to someone else in the next election.

But what if Wilma really doesn’t want the neighbor representative job, which will require about 20 hours a month. If she doesn’t or can’t put in this effort into the position, the neighbors will elect someone else in the next election. A year of a few ineffective neighborhood representatives does not stall the workings of the TDG.

What if Wilma likes the neighborhood representative job and serves well? Chances are good that she will be elected again. But all neighborhood (and higher tier) representatives should anticipate their service might end at the next election. The TDG has ways of moving people in and out of governance.

And this movement is good. The executive committees will always be a combination of old guard with knowledge of the past and new blood with new ideas, perspectives, and energy.

There is no parachuting of candidates in the TDG. Only residents can vote and be voted for in any neighborhood election. In the higher tiers, all representatives must also be residents in the area of those electoral units.

Some neighborhoods may keep the same representative for 10 or 20 years. Other neighborhoods may change out their representative every year.

Some neighborhood representatives won’t advance any higher in the TDG. They will stay at this low level. That is OK.

A few neighborhood representatives will find their way into the highest tier. But their starting place will always be earning the trust and respect of their neighbors.

Some rank-and-file TDG members may aspire to be the neighborhood representative. But the neighborhood elections will make this decision, not a well-run campaign.

And many rank-and-file members will be happy that they are not elected. Some people just don’t like meetings that much. That’s OK. They can still vote wisely.

Some representatives will have a flair for TDG governance. The TDG will become a bit of a career to them. They will consider their TDG service as an important part of their life. As long as the neighbors keep voting them in, there is nothing wrong with that.

Some representatives will not have this flair. They probably won’t go much higher.

Many TDG members won’t have the lifestyle to serve well as representatives. The lower-tier positions will require free evenings and weekends and being close to home to attend meetings. Many occupations are not designed for this public service. Ideally, employers should schedule an employee’s time to serve on the TDG; but this may not happen. Even though many of these TDG members likely won’t get elected, they still have an important role to play: attend TDG meetings when possible, send a little money, and—most importantly—vote wisely in the annual elections.

Some rank-and-file members might find themselves elected but can’t understand why. Their neighbors may have seen something in them that they cannot see in themselves. These representatives will serve as best they can. They might be reelected next year. Or might not.

Many citizens will get a little experience in TDG governance sometime in their lives. This experience will give them an innate understanding of why the TDG works so well. They will be good ambassadors for the TDG when they are out of office.

Published in Medium 2021

Merging TDGs

Initially, each local TDG is an independent entity, employing the principles of Tiered Democratic Governance. The eventual goal is to join all the TDGs together.

Early TDGs should be looking at TDGs adjacent to them to merge with. If there is no TDG in these areas, the TDG should put some resources toward starting them. They should find citizens in these areas willing to start their own local TDG. The “old” TDG can provide their experience for the “new” TDG to learn about TDG governance.

When two adjacent TDGs have matured, they should consider joining into one TDG. So the executive committees of the two TDGs should set up a joint committee to discuss a merger. Most likely, the two TDGs will have enough differences in their constitution that some issues need resolving. For example, one TDG may have its election in April and the other in September. When should the merged TDG have its election? The merging committee should discuss the merits of both systems and come to some agreement. Because the merged TDG is bigger, this might be a good time to add another tier to govern this larger area. In essence, the merging committee is writing a new constitution for the merged area.

When the merging committee gets its draft together, that draft goes to the executive committee- of the two TDGs. The executive committees might have some suggestions, which get sent back to the merging committee. That committee then refines the draft. Eventually the draft reaches a state where the executive committees of both TDGs approve.

Then both TDGs have to get approval from their members to approve of new constitution. When both memberships agree, the two local TDGs are now merged into one bigger TDG.

After the TDGs are merged, the builders should be monitoring the merger. For example, there might have been some small glitches in the elections because the members were voting with a slightly different electoral system. Maybe some constitutional changes are required. Or maybe only more education is needed. Solving all these problems is good practice for TDG governance.

If a merger between the two TDGs is not possible, the two TDGs should be looking for a different adjacent partner. The merger can be tried again after time and elections will replace a few executive committee members who may have been a hindrance to the earlier merger.

Starting a local TDG, writing its first constitution, amending that constitution, and now merging TDGs are going to give a lot of citizens practical experience in TDG governance. As the TDG gets bigger, many more citizens can relate to TDG governance because they have had an actual hand in developing that system. Having many members with first-hand experience is going to build credibility and legitimacy for this new system.

Published on Medium 2021

The First TDG Constitution

Riverbend is a fictional small town in the United States. In its northwest quadrant, a former Republican worker, Rich Riddell, gathers some neighbors together to build a new democracy. Rich and his neighbor Len Pash have just been laid off from their factory and have some free time. They are joined by several other neighbors. Holger Peters is approaching his final years as a high school teacher. Stacey Mabrall has finished college and is not employed in her field. Thelma Delgers is a receptionist at an accounting firm and taking distance accounting training. Rich and Len’s wives—Emily and Jackie—are welcoming these TDG meetings into their homes and taking part in the discussion. Eleven residents of Northwest Riverbend are building the USA’s first TDG constitution.

This document takes several months to develop. Meetings occur every couple of weeks. In between meetings, emails are exchanged. New ideas discussed. Holger keeps everyone talking. Stacey takes on the role of writer of the document, organizing the content and working in the changes. Rich uses his political experience with due process to move the group forward to the document’s ratification. This culmination of the document constitutes the first three chapters of “Diary of a Future Politician.” Eventually, the new constitution is ratified, and Northwest Riverbend elects its first executive committee.

My purpose of this novel is to show how average people can build this new democracy. When going through this document, ask yourself “Is this something I can help with?”

Here is the first constitution of Northwest Riverbend:

SECTION 1: TDG PRINCIPLES

We members of this TDG group believe that American democracy is failing us. We are striving to build a new replacement system of governance based on the TDG principles of (1) no political parties, (2) democratically elected representatives based on good character and capacity for governance, (3) no electioneering, and (4) a culture of consultation. We believe that we can build this system of governance to peacefully assume authority and responsibility of our current elected institutions.

SECTION 2: HUMANISTIC PRINCIPLES

We members of this TDG group believe in:

1. The equality of the male and female gender.

2. The equality of all races in America.

We, as individuals and as an organization, will strive to eliminate prejudice and discrimination on these fronts.

SECTION 3: BOUNDARIES

This TDG district shall encompass the northwest section of Riverbend. Exact boundaries shall include:

1. Battenor River to the south

2. Interstate I-XXX to the east

3. Riverbend’s municipal boundaries to the north and west.

This TDG district shall include the Riverbend neighborhoods of: (1) Creighton, (2) Davidson, (3) Grenfall, (4) Gull Lake, (5) Loon Lake, (6) Nipawin, (7) Oxbow, and (8) Senlac. We plan to eventually have these neighborhoods elect their own representatives.

SECTION 4: MEMBERSHIP

1. All members of this TDG shall have a primary residence in the district.

2. Members shall provide a mailing address to the executive committee for mailing purposes.

3. Members shall be at least 17 years old.

4. Members must be American citizens.

5. Members must affirm their acceptance of the principles in Sections 1 and 2.

6. Members cannot vote in TDG affairs until they have been members for at least 30 days.

SECTION 5: ELECTORAL RULES

1. The executive committee shall schedule an annual general meeting in the month of April. This meeting shall be the election of the executive committee to serve in the next year.

2. The executive committee shall keep a record of members.

3. The executive committee shall send by US Post official notice of this election meeting to all members.

4. All members attending this meeting shall be given a blank ballot.

5. Prior to voting, the current chairperson of the executive committee shall give a short speech about voting for good character and capacity for governance.

6. When voting, each member can write the name of one or two members as their choice for the executive committee. All ballots shall be placed in a ballot box.

7. When voting is finished, the ballot box shall be opened and votes shall be counted.

8. The four members who tally the most votes will constitute the new executive committee.

9. If there is a tie vote for fourth and fifth place, another round of balloting shall be conducted with these two as the only candidates.

10. The fifth place shall be recorded and may be called to serve the remainder of the term if another executive committee member can no longer serve.

SECTION 6: EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

1. The executive committee shall have authority and responsibility for all affairs of this TDG except amendments to the constitution.

2. Quorum for the executive committee is three members.

3. The executive committee is encouraged to attain a consensual decision. If consensus cannot be attained, a majority vote shall constitute the decision. If there is a tie vote, the member with the most votes at the annual meeting shall have the tie-breaking vote.

SECTION 7: ADVISOR

The executive committee can appoint an advisor to this TDG district.

SECTION 8: AMENDMENTS TO THE CONSTITUTION

1. The executive committee has the authority to formulate amendments to the constitution. When the drafting of an amendment is finalized and the executive committee approves the amendment, the executive committee shall send notice of the amendment meeting to all members by US Post.

2. Quorum of this meeting to amend the constitution shall be at least 10% of the membership.

3. Ratification of the amendment must be by a two-thirds vote of this TDG.

SECTION 9: MERGING TDGs

1. The executive committee has the authority to investigate and negotiate a merger with a neighboring TDG. When the draft of the new constitution for the merged area has been finalized and approved by the executive committee, the executive committee shall send notice of the merger meeting to all members by US Post.

2. Quorum of this meeting to merge the TDGs shall be at least 10% of the membership.

3. Ratification of the merger must be by a two-thirds vote of this TDG.

4. If the other TDG also ratifies, the TDGs will be considered merged and the new constitution shall prevail over this constitution.

Summary

I know you and neighbors can put a document like this together. Nearly all writers on Medium have the necessary writing skills.

You can even copy this document and make small changes for your neighborhood.

While I don’t like making political predictions because they are too often not right, I will make one right here: If no one goes through the process of writing local TDG constitutions, we will not get the democracy we yearn for.

Someone has to start building constitutions for this new democracy. It might as well be you.

Published on Medium 2021

Amending the TDG Constitution

When I published the first version of Tiered Democratic Governance (TDG) in 2000, I really didn’t have all the pieces together. The first version had a chapter on “Consultation,” which is a process where decision makers combine their knowledge, wisdom, and experience into one voice. This chapter has remained fairly intact into the fourth version.

One critic of the first version had a good question: “How do we move from HERE to THERE?” Well, I really didn’t have an answer for that question. But after some thinking, I surmised, “I need to give these early TDGers something to do—so they can get some practice making decisions with consultation.

So I let them write their local TDG constitution. The act of putting simple legalese together is great practice for building the culture that the TDG will require in the future.

After they have their first election, they are likely to find a few bugs with their electoral process or will see ways to improve the constitution. So, amending the constitution is also a great forum to practice and enhance consultation skills.

One of the advantages of the early TDG is that the stakes are not very high. There are no life-and-death issues. The sky won’t fall in if the constitution goes this way but not that way. Early TDGers need not hang their personal identity on a specific clause. They need only make their point clear, help other members make their point clear, have some good discussion about alternatives, pros, and cons—and follow where the consensus is taking the group.

Sometimes that consensus might put in some not-so-effective clauses in the constitution. The mistake will be realized as time passes. Then the local TDG will fix it. No one need get blamed or fired. The group just did its best with the knowledge, experience, and wisdom it had at the time. Now it has a little more knowledge, experience, and wisdom.

All these skills and attitudes will become cultural in the TDG. When the TDG moves into higher complexities of governance, it will have the tools to handle these issues much better than anything produced by western democracy.

So how will a local TDG amend its constitution?

The executive committee (the people elected at the last election) will identify a constitutional issue to be fixed. This issue could be membership requirements, ballots, electoral procedures, or several other facets of TDG governance. Then the executive committee should set up a sub-committee to address the issue(s). At least one person on this committee should be a good writer. There should be two members of the executive committee present plus three or four TDG members from the general membership. When this committee has its draft ready, the entire executive committee will review their work. The executive committee might have concerns that need addressing, so the draft gets sent back to the committee. Eventually the executive committee will approve the draft amendments.

But the amendment to the constitution requires approval from the membership. So, the executive committee shall call an amendment meeting of the membership. In the communique/notice of the amendment meeting and at the amendment meeting, the executive committee shall give its reasons for the suggested amendments. Members have the right to challenge the executive committee’s work at this meeting.

Finally, there shall be a vote. Some TDG members might approve of the amendment after studying and agreeing with the proposal. Others might approve the amendments just because of their trust in the executive committee to make the right changes. Some members may not approve, and the meeting should have a mechanism for them to explain their reasons to the executive committee.

If the amendment is approved by the membership, the amendments to the constitution are ratified and in force immediately after the amendment meeting.

If an amendment does not pass, the executive committee should have learned something from the objections. It can then make adjustments, rework the amendments, and hold another amendment meeting two or three months later.

Early TDG builders should plan on at least one amendment meeting a year. These meetings bring the executive committee and TDG membership together. These meetings require a lot of consultation beforehand to get amendments approved. And these amendments make the TDG constitution a little stronger. The future looks a little brighter when the TDG moves forward.

TDG Neighborhoods & Communities

My next-door neighbor Kathleen was a social butterfly. She was great at talking to neighbors. And her outdoor discussions led to a little social circle in our neighborhood. Eight houses somehow came together as a friend unit. We socialized. We helped one another out with childcare and moving furniture. We got to meet one another’s relatives.

The commonality was our neighborhood. Yes, we were all Caucasian and social drinkers. But there were different religions, different educations, different social classes, and different ages. It was a great, fun, and somewhat diverse group to belong to.

Kathleen’s group were not totally dependent on one another. We all had other communities we belonged to which were outside our neighborhood. For example, I was in Toastmasters and in politics. I made some good friends in those places. But it was still nice to come home and know some of my neighbors cared about me.

Tiered Democratic Governance (TDG) will delineate electoral units as 200-resident neighborhoods. Kathleen’s natural TDG neighborhood would be about two city blocks. Kathleen was well known to the eight houses. She was somewhat known to most of our block. Our block probably would have voted Kathleen as its TDG neighborhood representative.

But the block next to ours was not known to Kathleen. Would she still be elected when that block’s votes came in?

It probably doesn’t matter. Kathleen would have earned enough votes to be a viable contender. If someone from the other block had more votes, I’m sure that person was also a neighborhood leader and a good candidate for the position.

If Kathleen had been elected, she would have found ways to make that second block feel included. She would have been a good TDG representative.

One common criticism of the TDG is that many neighborhoods are not communities. So, the neighbors do not know one another well enough to vote wisely, based on good character and capacity for governance. Critics would say that Kathleen’s community is not normal.

To counter this criticism, I say the TDG will not be implemented overnight. It will start with a few neighbors recognizing that our current democracy is failing, and someone has to start building a new democracy. As these neighbors are building their first TDG constitution, they are also starting to form a little stronger community. The rest of the neighborhood will likely be disinterested in their initial workings.

But these early TDG builders will be gently letting the neighborhood know of what is happening. Invitations to join will be extended. A few more neighbors will join—and learn the TDG ways.

After a few TDG elections, members and non-members will start becoming impressed with the quality of the elected representative. Most of these people will seem capable. If not, the next election will replace them. “This TDG seems to be working,” neighborhood residents might muse.

Election Day will be an opportunity for neighbors to meet and become a little more known to one another. Neighbors will be meeting with vote tellers and fellow neighbors. There might even be a coffee pot and some pastries for voters to stay around and chat for a half hour or so.

These little connections will eventually form little groups of neighbors into social and helping circles. Just like Kathleen’s group. The TDG will be teaching neighbors the benefits of being a little nicer to one another—and more accepting of our little differences.

The TDG will be a source of community building in many neighborhoods. People will start caring more for people living next to them. People will now be living in communities. Maybe improved communities will be the best legacy of the TDG.