What if my TDG Representative won't Serve?

The electioneering nature of western democracy does one thing well. It almost always finds people willing to put in the long hours politics requires. One does not win internal party elections or general elections by sitting on one’s hands and wishing and hoping. Elected politicians have proven they are ready to put in the hours, sacrificing their family and recreation to be a politician.

And that lack of balance should be a topic for another article.

In contrast, the TDG elections do not have this filter. It is possible for some citizens to become elected into the first TDG tier and not put the time into the job. Here are several reasons:

1. Their occupation may not allow them to participate in TDG governance.
2. They might have too much going on in their personal lives.
3. Their health is not good.
4. They even not want to serve society in this capacity.

For whatever reason applies, that TDG neighborhood will not have an effective representative.

The solution is simple. The TDG annual elections mean such a representative does not serve for too long. The neighbors can vote for someone else next year. The neighborhood can try out another neighbor to represent them.

And with TDG being so granulated, TDG governance will not come to a standstill if 20% of its first-tier representatives are indeed ineffective. There will always be many first-tier representatives putting in their 20 hours a month into the TDG.

And if an ineffective neighbor is elected into the first tier, for sure that person will not advance to the second tier.

The TDG has its own checks-and-balances. I invite you to check out the TDG as a possible solution for the political mess we are in.

I Don’t Like My Neighbors

One of the criticisms of the TDG is that it starts with neighborhood elections. But neighbors do not know each other. Hence they cannot vote wisely for one of their neighbors into the TDG. Certainly, there is no point in voting for any of them. It makes more sense to vote for a glossed-over image the political parties proffer for us, right?

I say: “Get out and talk to your neighbors once in a while.”

True it is that the automobile and internet have given us communities that are not so geographically connected. These communities have people that are more like us than our neighbors. So we enjoy these communities more. Well, the TDG does not want to take those communities away from you.

But if our society is to advance, we need to move beyond our echo chambers. We need to learn how to converse with people who think differently than us. Our neighbors might be a great starting point. And we do have a common goal with our neighbors: where we live affects our psyche. Most of us would like a functioning community around us.

If you are in a TDG neighborhood, join that TDG. Get to know five neighbors. You don’t have to be best friends, but your little chats outside your residence will improve your local connections. When it is time to vote (in a TDG way), give your vote to the neighbor who best exemplifies your definition of good character and capacity for governance. That vote has so much power behind it. More power than voting for an image coming from a political party.
And with the TDG asking you to get to know more neighbors a little better so you can vote more wisely, your neighborhood just might be a little stronger community. One side benefit of the TDG.

Again I say, “Get out and talk to your neighbors once in a while.” Voting for one of them is where it all starts. Even if you associate with only five neighbors. One of them deserves your vote.
If you continue to say: “I don’t like my neighbors,” that is a problem you can fix.

“Get out and talk to your neighbors once in a while.”

Too Many TDG Representatives

A few critics of Tiered Democratic Governance have taken a look at my hypothetical TDG. I estimate that a city of 100,000 citizens will have about 600 TDG positions.

It is logical to assume that each of those positions will come with a six-figure salary, an office, and a partisan staffer or two (or three or four). That is how our current democracies work. The TDG seems to be multiplying this practice. So the budget for governing will increase dramatically. So I need to address this.

About 500 of these positions will be neighborhood representatives.

A large part of their job is to chat with their neighbors, getting a feel for what their neighborhood is thinking, and convey those feelings to the higher tiers.
While informal discussions are important, I hope each neighborhood representative holds a town hall meeting once or twice a year. This will be a good chance for neighbors to express their concerns (and get to know each other a little better). The neighborhood representative will likely not have any power to do much about those concerns, but he/she can certainly convey them to the higher tiers.

As well, the neighborhood representative should be attending meetings at the district level. This group should meet once a month. With these meetings, the representatives will find out what other neighborhoods are thinking. Unified concerns should be passed to the higher tiers.

The neighborhood representative position should be about 20 hours a month. While there will be a little juggling of time to fulfill the TDG obligations, neighborhood representatives will continue to work in their current occupations and attend to their family needs as before they were elected.

At this level, there will be no office and no staffers. No six-figure incomes.

I recommend the neighborhood representatives receive a small stipend for the formal meetings that they attend. But that would be something for each TDG to work out for itself.
In essence, a neighborhood representative is a volunteer or mostly volunteer position.

Similarly, the district representatives and most of the advisory positions will be volunteer or mostly volunteer. Many more citizens will serve in the TDG, and that experience will be an important part of their lives.

So, there won’t be a big cost to all these “new” positions. Even the cost of some stipends will be covered by more effective governance.

Consultation 2

How to make better societal decisions

The early TDG must consciously and deliberately build a culture of consultation. This culture is one of the four salient features of the TDG.

So we should put in a clause or two about consultation into the local TDG constitutions. But we cannot enforce that clause. Consultation comes only when the participants want to engage in this process.

I have briefly summarized “consultation” as follows:

Consultation is the combining of knowledge, experience, and wisdom of the participants into one voice.

If this sounds too utopic to you, this is probably because our current political culture — at least displayed in the media — is exactly opposite of the above phrase. Our real-life examples are people who insist that they are right and the people they disagree with are wrong. The victors in such a discussion are the ones who can shout the longest and loudest. We have been inculcated that this conflict is the only way to resolve our differences.

The early TDG builders must recognize that we must replace this bad example of decision making with a better way, a more consultative way. A kinder way. A wiser way.

The writing of a local TDG constitution is a forum where the early builders can practice. A constitution will have 50 or so clauses. The nature of these clauses is such that none of them will be “life-or-death” or “the-sky-is-falling.” This gives the early builders the freedom not to be so bound into any one position. They can seriously consider what other builders are thinking. When every builder puts out their opinions and perspectives, there will be a little consultative magic that finds the best consensus.

Undoubtedly, some builders might not like some of that consensus. If they believe that they have had the opportunity to speak and believe they have been listened to, they will more readily consent to the will of the majority.

In this way, the 50 or so clauses will be built one-by-one. Each clause is a practice opportunity for consultation. By the end of this process, the builders will have enhanced their consultative skills. They will be better prepared for the next big TDG project.

With this first constitution, the early builders will gain a sense that consultation is not an unreachable utopia.

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