by Joe Reynolds

United We Stand 

United We Stand and Divided We Fall. While everyone can relate to that expression, each of us has our own definition of ‘we’. That, unfortunately, will keep us divided. The ‘we’ might be our nation or community, maybe a social movement, or even a favourite sports team. It’s not often the whole of humanity though. Another expression we’ve all heard — ‘We’re All In This Together’ — was briefly popular early on in the pandemic. Yet, once vaccines became available, they were not shared in a fair way. We couldn’t even share rolls of toilet paper. Some may shrug it off, telling themselves ‘it was ever thus’, but we should keep in mind that as long as humans as a species remain divided, the world we know will continue to fall apart, possibly, as Hemingway said about bankruptcy, in “two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.”

Humans are cooperative though — it’s fundamental to our nature. With our relatively frail bodies, we’d have gone extinct long ago without the ability to organize communities and support each other.  Like other primates though, we recognize injustice when we see it and are unlikely to cooperate when treated unfairly. For most of our existence, we’ve lived in small egalitarian groups in which we know and trust everyone. In that context, we cooperate.

Competition

The discovery of agriculture changed everything. With a surplus of food available, some enterprising men came up with the novel concept of private property, and took control of it. Enter class politics. Ever since then, humans have been able to organize much larger societies, though always requiring the social control of the majority of people by a small minority, who happen to own most of the property. At times that control has been maintained purely through force, other times with the use of religion, and then sometimes with a ‘social contract’. We can look around the world and see all three methods being used today. Sadly though, any society built on inequality is inherently unstable and prone to crisis, and eventually, collapse. The human story is full of civilizations that have come and gone. We are now living through the gradual decline of the first global economic system.

There are, of course, thousands of diverse and distinct cultures around the world, but all are now trapped by the inescapable grip of capitalism’s invisible hand — which forces us all to compete with each other for survival. We have to compete as individuals, as communities, and as heavily armed nation states. As long as we live our lives in competition with each other, we’ll continue to gradually destroy the biosphere that keeps us all alive.  Humanity is trapped in this inhumane competitive system and, like an escape room, we’ll have to learn to cooperate to save ourselves along with the rest of the biosphere, and time is running out.

What about the United Nations one might ask? Unfortunately, the UN doesn’t actually represent humanity at all. Instead, the general assembly represents only the most powerful people in each competing nation state, whether democratic or autocratic, and ultimately all decisions rest with the security council, whose five permanent members, each with veto power, are currently at war over Ukraine and possibly soon Taiwan. The UN simply does not provide the democratic forum that we need to solve global problems collectively. It’s not going to get better; a functioning global democracy can’t be built on undemocratic foundations.

Confederation

Occasionally, humans have formed larger cooperative societies based on equality by creating a confederation of self-governing communities. The Haudenosaunee Confederacy is one such example. Created nearly a thousand years ago, it brought together five nations which were previously at war, into a cooperative union called the Great League of Peace. Some historians argue that American democracy was inspired by that system. Whether that’s true or not, the founders of the US constitution left out the most important part — self-governing communities. 

In Haudenosaunee democracy, clan groups govern themselves, then each chooses representatives to a central governing council. In contrast, American democracy, and liberal democracy generally, gathers together voters who don’t know each other, to elect someone to rule over them for a fixed period of time. Naturally then, everyone votes in their own personal interests rather than the collective interests of the community as a whole. 

The resulting system is a dysfunctional version of democracy which is easily corrupted by economic power, and incentivizes the polarization of political parties. As the American system spirals out of control, the Haudenosaunee people (called Iroquois by the French) continue to practice democracy today, although now with severely limited powers of self-governance, since their lands were stolen by European colonizers and are currently divided between the U.S. and Canada.

Similar, although short lived, forms of democracy have been created spontaneously during moments of revolutionary upheaval, such as the Paris Commune in 1871, and the Soviet (council) system during the Russian revolution in February 1917. The Commune survived only two months before being crushed by the combined efforts of the French and Prussian states — two enemies uniting to prevent the inspiration of radical democracy spreading through Europe. Tragically, Soviet democracy was destroyed from within, when the Bolshevik party seized power for themselves in October 1917, creating the authoritarian regime which has been mislabelled as ‘communism’, and causing division and confusion among progressives for over a century. If it weren’t for the October revolution, which was really more of a coup d’état, Soviet democracy might have gradually spread to other communities around what could have been a very different world today. 

Other examples include Germany in 1918, Hungary in 1956, Iran in 1979 and even presently in Rojava, Syria. There have been so many spontaneous examples that it would seem to be the most natural form of human government. Most importantly though, it is the form of democracy which would be best able to scale up to include everyone. It’s been called ‘council democracy’ by Hannah Arendt, or ‘democratic confederalism’ by Murray Bookchin, but the name is not important. What matters is that self-defining communities govern themselves, and together they form a cooperative network for collective decision making.  Each time they’ve been created though, rising up in isolation with very limited experience, they’ve been easily destroyed, like a tragic game of Whac-A-Mole, devastating human lives and communities. 

Global Cooperation

Our challenge, I would argue, is to create a community-based democratic system, which can scale up gradually over time to eventually include all humans, while at the same time not posing any immediate threat to capitalism so as to avoid once again inviting destruction. At some point in our future, humanity collectively might then be able to decide together how to replace capitalism with a system that is fair for all. As David Graeber wrote about the embryonic democratic system developing during Occupy Wall Street, “but was it our job to come up with a vision for a new political order, or to help create a way for everyone to do so?”

Global cooperation will require the creation of a new global democratic system which is inclusive to all humans. This is not a new idea — just very hard to accomplish. The World Federalist Movement has been promoting it since 1947. The Industrial Workers of the World have been trying to create “one big union” since 1905. But, how can a system which is currently keeping us all alive be replaced? The new system must be fully functional and tested before we dismantle capitalism. Otherwise, billions of people are likely to suffer or die.

Constituent Power

As Fredric Jameson said, it is “easier to imagine the end of the world than to imagine the end of capitalism.” Perhaps that explains why there are so many books and movies about the end of the world, and far fewer about how to end capitalism. Of course, it is actually relatively easy for a small group of people to end the world if they have access to massively destructive weapons or technology. Ending capitalism, on the other hand, will require finding a way for the majority of people to cooperate in creating a new system. 

Any new system of governance can only be established by constituent power — those rare moments when enough of the population can agree to accept a new constitution which everyone must then live by. Constituent power is usually considered a temporary state of affairs, being so difficult to organize, but the internet, a global communication system, now makes it possible to organize global constituent power … if we use it properly. 

Many believed, back in the 90s and briefly after the millennium, that the internet had the potential to bring us democracy and a better world. Douglas Rushkoff’s 2003 book Open Source Democracy predicted hopefully that “the rise of interactive media does provide us with the beginnings of new metaphors for cooperation, new faith in the power of networked activity and new evidence of our ability to participate actively in the authorship of our collective destiny.”  Too few people took him up on the idea though, so that sense of optimism dissipated as facebook and other platforms began to demonstrate how capitalism would now be able to use the internet to extract ever more profit, and further erode liberal democracy. The internet certainly does provide the hardware for a global democratic network. The problem is that we have, so far, allowed capitalists to design the software in their own interests.

Ideology Divides Us

Global democracy was never going to happen automatically — we’ll have to design and build it together. Unfortunately, ideology gets in the way of organizing. When we organize a movement based on ideology, it immediately excludes anyone who doesn’t agree. Sure, we can always hope to convince the others of the brilliance of our plan, but in reality, organizing ideologically automatically inhibits growth. Movements inevitably reach a limit and then begin splintering into factions divided by ideological differences. Many people wish to ‘unite the left’ but, even if that were possible, we’d only end up in a global civil war against a ‘united right’. No one wins that.

Furthermore, ideological movements, in order to grow, must make demands on our time, energy, and finances, and sometimes involve personal risk. This is a lot to ask from people who have very busy lives and are struggling just to survive and feed their kids. It’s simply unrealistic to expect masses of people to commit themselves to any ideological project, no matter how progressive. Organizing ideologically will never bring together the numbers of people necessary to actually change the world. Despite what Margaret Mead famously, but mistakenly, said about “a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens” changing the world, in truth, movements have only ever been able to change parts of the world, and even then, only temporarily. Any problems that can be solved by movements, are actually only symptoms of the real problem, which is that we humans are divided and in competition with each other. While movements are of course essential to solve specific problems, the sad reality is that as the global system collapses around us, many movements may, in the end, amount to little more than bailing water on the Titanic.

Movements have definitely influenced the world, but at this point in history we desperately need a way for eight billion people to cooperate and act collectively. No movement will bring us there. However, when we organize unions, we do so in a very different way. We allow and encourage all workers to join the union, no matter what their ideology. Once a union is organized, the members can then debate ideology in healthy democratic discussions in order to make decisions together and act collectively. To change the whole world collectively, we’ll need to organize a non-ideological global union of the majority of humans, to decide together how to replace capitalism with a cooperative system which is inclusive to all.

A Global Digital Community Centre

The internet makes this possible now because all of humanity is already organized into real communities which can all be gradually organized into a global democratic network by creating a platform-cooperative which requires the registration of a real community to participate. We can think of it as a global digital community centre, with only one requirement for membership: registration of a real community that we belong to. As people choose to join the platform, which would obviously have to be worth joining, they will be simultaneously connecting the community they’ve chosen to register, to the growing network of real communities.

The term ‘online community’ is an oxymoron. It’s true that many people have shared their interests, made good friends, and even developed lasting relationships after first meeting each other online, but clearly we can never really trust online connections since there is no way to be sure that anyone is who they say they are. Or even if they’re human, as opposed to AI. 

Every internet platform faces the problem of anonymity, and must then deal with all the anti-social behaviour inevitably arising when angry individuals know that they can say or do anything they want and face no consequences. A simple requirement though, of registering a real community that we are part of (our workplace, school, religious or cultural community, neighbourhood…) can remove the element of anonymity from this platform. Each individual’s behaviour on the platform would then be self-policing, just as we all behave within our communities, for the simple reason that they will have to explain themselves to their own registered community if they behave in an anti-social way on the platform. 

Instead of leaving it up to AI, or traumatizing underpaid workers as the corporate platforms do, communities themselves would moderate content on the platform. For example, if a user has a complaint about another user, resolution of that situation might then involve their two communities having discussions together. It might require the intervention of another community to help resolve it. Maybe ultimately, the collective will decide to suspend an individual’s access to the platform or even a whole community’s access. In this way we can gradually develop democratic processes together, and eventually a global democratic community network might be able to find solutions to global problems which currently seem impossible to solve.

Democracy From Below

We can’t trust the internet, but we all belong to at least one, and usually several real communities that we can trust, such as our neighbourhood, our religious or cultural community, our workplace, our school, and many other types of self-determining communities. Each of our identities on the platform can be verified by our chosen community allowing a global democratic system that we can all trust, to be built gradually by linking those real communities together, one at a time. 

To access the platform, individuals must maintain good standing in their chosen community, and each community, to keep its access, must maintain good standing with all of the other communities in the network. Those self-governing communities would each choose delegates to represent them at a local council. As self-governing local councils gradually spring up around the world, they would each send delegates to a regional council. Self-governing regional councils would then send delegates to a global council. The internet platform-cooperative provides a very convenient communication system, and can facilitate the creation of a global democratic system, but democracy itself would exist within and between our communities in the real world rather than on the internet.

There have of course been many other proposals for global ‘e-democracy’ making use of the internet. Typically though, they require complicated and potentially very expensive methods of verifying identities. It would be nearly impossible to prevent sabotage or abuse of such a system, and since access to the internet is not equal for everyone, it would still not be a fair and representative democracy. Any democracy relying on the internet would leave us dependent on technology which really can’t be trusted. The internet is a great tool to help us build it, but democracy must be based in our real communities in the real world if we expect people to trust it and choose to participate.

Permanent Democracy

Many of us have come to see democracy as an ‘event’ which occurs periodically, rather than part of our daily lives. With community-based democracy however, there would no longer be the need for simultaneous elections as we know them now. Instead, each self-governing community would choose their delegates whenever they decide to. Ideally, those delegates should receive no special privilege, and be immediately recallable, in order to prevent misuse of the position and to ensure that the choices of communities are represented properly. This can’t be decided in advance of course; communities must be allowed to decide for themselves how they are best represented.

Political parties, which have come to dominate modern politics while feeding the ideological divisions between us all, would likely play a declining role in a community-based democratic system. The way that liberal democracy functions, allowing economic power to influence elections, has gradually enabled political parties to dominate our polarizing societies. It is rare that even two people can agree on everything, yet within political parties there is an expectation that everyone hold the same ideology — as religions do. 

In a competitive society based on property ownership, it’s inevitable that democracy becomes nothing more than a competition between political parties and personalities. In a cooperative society conversely, political parties would no longer serve much purpose at all, and might gradually disappear.

Rather than voting for a leader at the top of society, which often leads to corruption and a system which few people actually trust, democratic communities would govern our world collectively from below. Of course, not all communities currently practice democracy. Those that don’t, will have to gradually learn from others that do. As individuals choose to join the platform cooperative, they will have an incentive to convince the rest of their community to get involved as well. All of our communities are already interconnected; we simply lack a mechanism allowing us to make use of that network.

Self-Organizing System

Social activists and organizers are often frustrated by the limited interest that most people show for getting involved in movements for social change, yet we can watch as millions will eagerly join a new internet platform which provides a service or some amusement to them. There’s nothing we can do to change that reality, so why not make use of it instead? Facebook has ‘organized’ the most people in human history simply by offering something that is useful, or just fun, and makes no demands. 

We know that those users are in fact the product that facebook is selling, and of course they are not organized in any practical way to bring about positive social change, but imagine if facebook had originally been created as a democratic platform-cooperative, instead of a profit-seeking corporation. It might now be a democratic organization of over 3 billion people, possibly even in a position to demand from corporations and governments the changes we need for a better world. The best time to begin building a democratic platform-cooperative to create global democracy was twenty years ago. The next best time is to begin now.

The creation of an open-source, democratic, platform-cooperative which can provide all the useful features that people want from the internet, without the anti-social and profiteering side, could be very popular and entice many people to join. It might also be able to re-create the once hopeful and innocent online atmosphere of the early internet.  The requirement to register a community when they join, can gradually create a global network of self-determining communities, which might finally allow humanity to act collectively. 

Building Open Source Democracy

This is obviously a monumental task with no guarantee of success. It will require many volunteers to design, build, maintain, and fund it. The ultimate goal is to eventually have everyone choose to contribute in whatever way they can, to the best of their abilities. At the same time, it requires completely rethinking our approach to social change. As long as activists think in terms of organizing ‘our side’, within an ‘us versus them’ vision for social change, humanity will continue to be divided meaning that global collective decision making and action, remains impossible. 

It is, of course, perfectly rational to seek like-minded people to organize with when trying to change the world and yet, that has never worked. For millennia, people hoping to change the world have proposed their idea for a better world, then tried to find enough supporters of their idea with the goal of reaching a ‘tipping point’ which would bring about the desired change. Some movements have simply disappeared; others live on as powerful religions or political parties today. On a small scale, organizing ideological movements does bring about change, but it’s not possible to change the whole world that way. 

However, if we reverse that way of thinking, and instead we work first to organize enough people into a democratic network, then together we might be able to develop the ideas necessary to change the world collectively. We either trust democracy or we don’t. What is the point of designing the perfect form of governance if we have no way to put it into practice? We need to switch our thinking from building an ideological movement, to building a union that everyone can feel comfortable to join.

The Ideology of Non-Ideology

Some might argue that we need at least some ideological limitations on who can join. For example, we shouldn’t allow fascists to join the collective, right? That’s not really necessary though, and once we begin excluding one group, where does it stop? Currently, under liberal democracy, we can’t possibly know which of our neighbours or co-workers might hold fascist ideas as long as they don’t feel confident to express them publicly. Individual fascists rarely announce themselves within the real communities they belong to, and other communities collectively are not going to choose to include a group calling themselves fascist. Again, we’ll have to take a chance and trust the decisions that our future, democratically organized communities, might take. 

Is this an ideological project pretending to be non-ideological? Maybe, but this idea only needs a few people to believe that it could work, among them at least one programmer, in order to get started. But the platform which can actually bring humanity together, must be built in a way that doesn’t exclude anyone for ideological reasons. It requires building an organization that follows no ideology, only mutual respect according to the standards that the collective decides. Is it a leap of faith? Maybe a leap of logic? We’ll never know if it could work unless we try to build it.

When the majority of people are truly allowed to practice democracy, we will collectively make wise choices. But first, we’ll need to create that democracy. Ultimately, in order to prevent the eventual collapse of the world we know, united we must stand.

Many of the so-called spiritual people–who are into meditation, exploring higher states of consciousness or   nondualism,   psychic phenomena,  and other   spiritually transformative experiences–have the belief that if a sufficient number of people are transformed by these experiences, then that alone will dramatically improve the world.  Many have expressed the sentiment that we don’t need to think or learn about all the bad and negative things going on in the world. We don’t need to be political or to get angry about what our government is doing to us and other nations.  We just need to be more loving in all of our daily relationships. Without a doubt there is power in love. However, to disempower the wealthiest one percent, the Shadow Government and Deep State that control our government and the mainstream media–it will take more than just love.  It will take large numbers of people becoming informed and demanding political and ecological change to make this world a better place.  

Meditation methods, such as the popular  mindfulness meditation approach, may help a person relax, be more creative, and experience joy and bliss, but meditation alone cannot solve world problems.  I have promoted meditation for many years and have participated in many Buddhist, yoga, Unity, Science of Mind, and Unitarian Universalist meditation groups.  However, if intellectuals are those who enjoy thinking and studying about how to improve society, then the world needs intellectuals more than it needs meditators. 

In an article about the  myths of meditation,  it was stated that meditation starves the mind  of stimulus. The mind is considered a barrier between us and the absolute.  It is believed that the very energy of thought keeps us from experiencing God.  Meditation stifles the questioning, rational mind. 

It is true that when we concentrate and become aware of just our breathing or body sensations in the ever-changing now moment, our natural, sequential thinking process is blocked; but if we do this a few minutes a day, it is a good thing.   Not identifying with our habitual thought patterns can give us a fresh perspective about our life concerns. There is nothing to “do” in meditation. Meditation is about awareness. If while we are meditating, we are trying to be calm and relaxed, then that “trying” is “doing,” and it is not considered meditation.  It might be considered contemplationinstead, which is also be good thing, but it is not meditation.   Meditation seems so simple, yet it is a challenge to just unconditionally accept and be aware of this very now moment without thinking about it in the usual, natural way that we do.  If you try it and keep getting distracted or bored, just gently bring your attention back to the focal point or task without getting upset or impatient with yourself. So, yes, there are benefits to meditation, but in order to be responsible world citizens or to learn skills other than meditation, we will have to think, study, and learn using the rational mind.         

Back in the 70s, many of us erroneously believed that people who could become enlightened would get infinite knowledge about everything.  I am reminded of Ram Dass  who reported in one of his books that when he first met his guru   Neem Karoli Baba,  the revered Indian saint told him that the previous night he was sitting out under the stars thinking about his mother, and that is exactly what Ram Dass was doing, which completely astounded him.  So it does seem that psychics and yogis can access bits of information about various things, but nobody gets a full download or transmission of an infinitely knowing, loving, and all-powerful male God, as He is conceived in monotheistic religions.  In Eastern thought, there is no God that is separate and distinct from the universe. Instead, there is an indescribable fountain of love and joy at the core of our being, that is part of our nature, not separate from it. It is accessed when we go beyond the subject-object duality of the ego into the mystical oneness of selflessness.          

People who have had  Near Death Experiences  have also reported being in the presence of what they sometimes call the Source Energy of the universe, which seemingly knew everything about them but still loved them unconditionally.  Reportedly when the experiencers   came back to life, after their heart stopped beating, they were afterwards completely changed by their experience and started a new lifestyle of being more compassionate toward others, while never again having a fear of death.  More people becoming kind and loving is certainly something the world needs more of. However, it is not enough to solve national and international problems. 

The biggest obstacle to creating world peace is the   imperialism of the United States.  If the United States would stop trying to sabotage, or do regime change, of the countries of the world that hinder its world dominance in one way or another, it would set a precedent and good example for other nations.  

If it would take   four earths  for everyone in the world to have the same lifestyle as the average American, then that means we in the United States need to choose   voluntary simplicity so that others can simply live.  The irony is voluntary simplicity would make us happier.  Here is a 10-minute video that might make you cry about a millionaire who found the  meaning of life. Since most social problems develop to the degree there is a   gap between the rich and the poor  within a nation and among nations, then a worldwide radical egalitarianism is necessary if we want to greatly reduce social problems.  Even the Green New Deal   does not go far enough in reducing extravagant lifestyles and massive growth.  

E.F. Schumacher wrote the classic book  Small is Beautiful: A Study of Economics As if People Mattered  in 1973.  It was he who coined the term  Buddhist Economicsin 1955.  Here is a transcription of a 2-minute video on Buddhist Economics by economist  Clair Brownthat you can also listen to at her website:   

Can we create an economy that cares for both the human spirit and our planet earth with wellbeing and happiness for all people?  Our materialistic and wasteful carbon-based economy has created enormous inequality. The rich lead lavish lifestyles while billions of others suffer in poverty.  Our relentless consumption has plundered the environment and sickened the earth. Yet we remain stubbornly obsessed with free market economics. At the heart of free market economics are three false beliefs about humans and the world we live in: 1) People are self-centered, caring only about themselves.  2) People are chasing after income to support fancy lifestyles. 3) The environment exists for human domination.

It’s clear our economic focus on increasing income and consumption just isn’t working.  Is there a different model? Yes. Buddhist economics is based on three truths: 1) Human nature is kind and altruistic.  2) People are interdependent with each other. 3) People are interdependent with nature. We can escape the cycle of disappointment and despair that comes from endlessly chasing after money, from always wanting more and more.  We use awareness to enjoy life to the fullest without relying on consumerism. 

In Buddhist economics, economic performance means delivering well-being to everyone, not just delivering more income to the rich.  When the rich have even more income, they buy bigger mansions and yachts and travel to more exotic places. When low income families have more money, they live healthier, more fulfilling lives.  Society becomes better off when we reduce status consumption by the wealthy and increase basic consumption by those at the bottom. Buddhist economics shows us how to get off the materialistic treadmill and focus on the things that are important to us, living mindfully and caring for Mother Earth and each other.   

Here is a short video about the  zero waste lifestyle.  We can become conscious of our environmental footprint.  In this video a family created only a jar's worth of waste in one year!  If we care about the future of the planet, we should care about the effects of   industrial animal agriculture or factory farming.  Here is probably the best speech on  animal cruelty,  and  here is the  transcription of it.  Dr. Michael Gregor’s  vegan website NutritionFacts.org    is also highly recommended.    

One of our national problems is that our public schools are not instilling in students an insatiable desire to make the world better.  We can’t expect teachers, especially at the elementary level, to personally share their own radical political and spiritual beliefs with students when teachers play the role of being extensions of the government.  If teachers express the sentiment “support the troops, bring them all home” when a soldier speaks at their school after returning from the battlefield, or if teachers say they are an atheist, Buddhist, Muslim, communist, or homosexual–they can expect either the administration or parents to complain, which can put their jobs and retirement plans in jeopardy.  

The major world religions could be taught in public schools from a scientific perspective; otherwise, students may only have the devotional orientation that they learn from their parents and place of worship.  Instead of teaching history in a neutral, sterile, and amoral way, teachers should have the freedom to be passionate about their own personal beliefs, provided they objectively share opposite viewpoints. Howard Zinn’s book  Peoples History of the United States could be part of the high school curriculum.  

Removing the top-down hierarchy in public schools and encouraging neighborhood control of public elementary schools is something that has never been tried before. This policy would encourage neighborhood togetherness, and it would build a sense of community which is lacking in today’s society.  We could encourage neighbors to pick their own school boards and teachers who, using public funds, could create a school philosophy and curriculum that reflects the shared values of the neighborhood. In the age of the internet, we can encourage tribal or intentional communities.  Though many of us live isolated, private lives, we are wired to be part of a  community.      

The  new world order of global warfare  is something that we should be very concerned about.  However, a world government  is not a bad idea if it is truly democratic. Until we take all money out of politics and equally empower at least seven national and state political parties, we will never live in a democratic society.    

The following 9 social sins have stagnated the ethical development of the United States:  imperialism, nationalism, corporate capitalism,  anti-environmentalism, racism,  speciesism,  consumerism,  patriarchy, and the discrimination against the LGBTQ community. 

Eventually the threat of World War III, global warming, and other environmental problems will become so terrifying that we can only hope that the United States and other nations will wake up before the last hour, and if it is not too late, they will agree to work together in making drastic changes.  But the sooner we realize that we are “one world, one planet, and one humanity,” the better it will be. 

Here are 15 proposals that could make our nation and the world a better place:           

1..Require  workplace democracy to allow workers to participate in all the decision making at their place of employment: one person, one vote for all companies that have 5 or more employees. The workplace does not have to be a dictatorship.    

2..Provide free health care and free higher education for everyone.  The best way to encourage higher learning is to make it free. 

3..Make public transportation free by bus or train within our cities.  Expand the use of trains for commercial shipping. Put a moratorium on the increase of cars and trucks on the nation’s highways.  Place a steep tax on fuel for cars to encourage individuals to use buses and trains. When appropriate, we can use small buses that run more often instead of always using big buses.             

4..Reduce military spending by 90%, and as other countries reciprocate, it can be reduced further. The U.S. will take the initiative in getting all nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants dismantled. The U.S. will bring home all military personnel and close down the government’s 700 military bases around the world.  “And they shall turn their swords into ploughshares (Isaiah 2:4).”  Many of the existing military ships, submarines, and planes throughout the world will be used for low-budget travel and tourism to promote goodwill among nations.  With less than one percent of what the world spends every year on weapons, we could put every child in school. 

5. Provide a guaranteed income of $12,000 per year to all U.S. citizens over the age of 18. Set the minimum wage at $15 per hour.  For individuals working a 40-hour week at a minimum of $15 per hour, the annual salary will be $30,000.  To promote a system of radical egalitarianism, here is the new federal income tax schedule for individuals:  Any income up to $25,000 will have a 0% federal tax. Income from $25,001–$30,000 will have a 5% tax. Income from $30,001–$35,000 will have a 10% tax.  Income from $35,001–$40,000 will have a 15% tax, and so forth. An income above $120,000 will be taxed at 100%. The ratio of the highest earning income to the lowest will be 10:1. 

The  current corporate tax rate  has fallen from 35% to 21% in a flat tax system, but large corporations, especially transnational corporations, should pay a much higher percentage of taxes than smaller companies.  We can implement the corporate tax recommendations of the organization called Americans for Tax Fairness.       

6..Phase out the use of fossil fuels  in 5 years. They will be replaced by alternatives such as wind, solar, and  hemp.  The nation will implement zero-waste policies for all individuals and companies to the maximum degree possible.

7.  Equally empower the 7 largest national and state political parties for every national and state election. The 7 largest parties will get equal public exposure.  Corporations will not be allowed to donate to political campaigns. 

8. Abolish the Electoral College system for electing a president.

9.  Abolish the Federal Reserve and allow the Treasury Department to oversee a nationwide public banking system.  

10. Legalize marijuana and biodegradable  hemp for industrial purposes at the national level. Legalize plant  psychedelics for adult therapeutic and spiritual reasons.    

11. Provide incentives for organic and composted food production in backyards. Provide incentives for farmers and food cooperatives that provide locally grown food.  Ban all genetically modified foods. Encourage veganism for environmental, ethical, and health reasons. 

12. Allow United States citizens to visit any country they wish.  All existing U.S sanctions and embargoes on any country shall be removed.  

13. Let the American people vote to determine if they want a Constitutional Convention for a new constitution at every presidential election. If approved by a 51-percent majority of the American people, allow all national political parties that capture at least one percent of the vote be represented through proportional representation at a Constitutional Convention to work together to create a much better constitution.  One hundred delegates will meet for 3 months, and if they create a new document approved by 51 percent of the delegates ( a higher percentage will be even better)–it will be ratified later if a 51-percent majority of the American people approve of the new constitution. Each of the 50 states can be encouraged to create a new state constitution using the same method. 

Creating a new government with a unicameral federal legislature in tandem with a system of proportional representation for electing the federal legislature is one thing the constitutional convention delegates might incorporate in the new constitution.  Also, making it easier to pass future laws and future amendments is also recommended. (I have created a 24-month procedural timeline for creating a new constitution in this document.  I have also created my own version of a new constitution called the  Third Constitution of the United States; our first constitution was the Articles of Confederation.)     

14. Eliminate the unfair Security Council of the United Nations and make the General Assembly of the UN more powerful than any nation in order to create a democratic world government. The weight of any nation’s vote will be determined by its population.  The Earth Federationand other organizations have also proposed models for a democratic world government.     

15. Encourage the self-determination of local areas whenever possible and  build cohesive communities by providing incentives for the neighborhood control of public elementary schools in pilot projects.       

The spiritual discipline of meditation and all acts of love and kindness provide nourishment and healing to a society.  But such measures must be combined with political policies that promote the self-actualization of every person in every nation and ecological wisdom so that there can be a sustainable future for all of our descendants.