The Theory of the Integration of Rights and Citizens - China's Way Out (1)

"The political system is like a car that carries society, and the social will is its proper driving route. Although the political car with a dual structure cannot be separated from the social will in the general direction, there are not many just right conditions, and it always swings left and right. Even falling into a ditch or hitting a cliff.

The steering wheel of the autocratic political car is in the hands of those in power. Others are isolated in the passenger area and cannot be interrogated. Only when the accident is frequent and the head is smashed, the unbearable passengers can break the isolation and get a new driver. Will be isolated and enter the next cycle.

The representative system allows passengers to regularly recommend drivers, and can also comment on drivers, but the selected driver may not be suitable, or the driver will become willful, and it will be difficult to replace it until the next election. Fortunately, there is no need to risk the car crash and riot, although there is a lag, you can wait until a new driver is elected before correcting the deviation.

The fundamental solution is to replace it with an autonomous vehicle that is directly controlled by social will. For example, the idea of driving described in science fiction works, the car can be driven how the society thinks. The progressive self-organized "and carrier" is equivalent to the "idea" of the social will, and its embodiment of the social will is equivalent to the driving of the social car. The social will is the driving route of the social vehicle, and the social vehicle is controlled by the social will, forming a perfect self-consistency. "

question

In the so-called democracy, an indispensable point is that every voice of the people is not ignored. So, can it be achieved with the current communication method? I'm afraid not. Usually, when a group of hundreds of people is discussing things, there will be a situation where each person speaks his own words, and the individual will cannot be fully expressed. There is no need to talk about a society of hundreds, thousands, or hundreds of millions of people. So, is there a solution? Mr. Wang Lixiong put forward a solution in "Theory of Civil Rights."

in daily life. A conversation between two friends. It can be said that it is a full expression of personal will. In this conversation, everyone can learn the will of others through their words, actions, demeanor, etc., and in such a group, communication is two-way, each member will be more or more Be less influenced by others, (imagine what happens when different colors of paint are mixed together). When such a small group decides things, it will inevitably reflect the individual will of all members (everyone will pursue the satisfaction of individual will), that is, "group will", and things are also determined by the group will. It follows from this that democracy can be achieved within groups that can communicate directly.

From this conclusion, it can be seen that the larger the group, the easier it is for individual voices to be ignored. After all, in a group that can communicate directly, a person is a fraction, or at least a few tenths, but in society, it is a few percent, a few tens of thousands, a few hundred million one . In today's society, the voices of individuals are too small, so their voices must be heard through certain channels or assembled together, but it is too difficult for them,

Problem Solving - Progressive Self-Organization

Groups that can communicate directly can achieve democracy, but large-scale groups cannot. It can be seen that "achieving democracy" must be achieved by small groups. How do small groups and large groups connect? - grouping. Divide the large group into several small groups, and each small group elects a representative who conforms to the "will of the group". The representatives then elect representatives, and finally a leader who is satisfied with the people can be elected (this is the formation of Mr. Wang Lixiong. the so-called "progressive self-organization" process). Does this rhetoric sound familiar - "the system of the people's congress", but Mr. Wang Lixiong put forward two conditions that make them very different.

They are: ①The people freely form small groups that can communicate directly ②“Representatives” can be elected at any time

As mentioned earlier, only small groups that can communicate directly can achieve democracy, so the large group must be divided into small groups that can communicate directly. The question is, how to divide it? Assuming a maximum of 30 people in a group that can communicate directly, then each Level 1 group (the lowest level) must have no more than 30 people, and every no more than 30 Level 1 representatives form a Level 2 group, and so on. Not exceeding the scale of direct communication is the key, without it, it is equivalent to abolishing martial arts.

People change, so do representatives. When a representative deviates from the will of the group, members of the group should re-elect representatives, and elections in small groups will not be time-consuming and laborious, so elections can be made at any time. Mr. Wang Lixiong described election at any time in his book "Theory of the Integration of Rights and Citizens" as follows:

However, since everyone pursues the satisfaction of their own will, how can we ensure that the elected will not be based on their own will, but will always faithfully serve as the "and carrier"? Of course, the elected cannot be expected to voluntarily give up their personal pursuits. Even if it can be done for a while, it will never last. The fundamental restriction is that as long as the elected person deviates from the will of the community, he can be immediately dismissed and replaced by a new one.

Therefore, it is required that elections for "and carriers" can be held at any time, rather than fixed terms. This is a major change for the election. Elections involving large crowds cost the people and money and can only be held on a regular basis. The experience-based election requires no funds, no time, no hosting, no campaigning, and no cumbersome procedures such as voter registration, voting procedures, and vote counting, and can be activated by any member at any time.

Once elections are available at any time, there is an important and wonderful effect—every step the elected person takes in performing his duties is equivalent to facing a new election. That election doesn't actually happen, just because it could happen at any time, it will be simulated in the mind of the elected first. In order to avoid electing him to be dismissed at any time, the elected must follow the will of the community at all times and correct any minor deviations in time, so as to always remain an accurate "and carrier".

Therefore, the possibility of elections at any time does not mean that elections will take place at any time, but because of the possibility of elections at any time, the elected people are urged to always follow the will of the community unremittingly, and constantly correct deviations. Instead, re-election becomes unnecessary. elections may be less likely. The "inclusive but not issued" of elections at any time brings another effect, that is, the community only needs to perform the vector summation of the election "and the carrier", and it can achieve the vector summation of other community affairs, but does not need to actually vectorize those transactions. beg for peace. The mechanism is that the vector summation of everything by all the individual wills in the community goes from reality to the mind of the elected. Because of the constraints of election at any time, the tacit agreement, revision and integration of the elected will always be consistent with the will of the community (that is, the vector sum of the individual wills of all members), which is completely consistent with the result of the actual vector summation, so it is no longer necessary to actually carry out Vector summation. Otherwise, even in the realm of experience, the vector summation of individual wills cannot be performed all the time and become a daily operation.

Why is there a big difference between progressive self-organization and the People's Congress system? Let's take a look at what Mr. Wang Lixiong said:

Suppose there are 1,000 villagers in an administrative village, beyond the scope of full and direct communication, no matter whether it is tacit agreement or language, whether it is consultation or election, the sum of the vectors cannot be obtained. The elected elected cannot rely on tacit agreement to reconcile the individual will of a thousand villagers. When their will to power deviates from the will of the community, villagers can neither find out in time nor elect at any time. Regular elections with a scale of 1,000 people need to rely on the moderator. Those in power who occupy the presidency position only communicate in their own favor and limit communication that is not conducive to themselves, and they can often continue to be elected. This is the current status of China's "village autonomy".

Hundreds of people directly elect a township/county people's congress representative, hundreds of township/county people's congress representatives elect a provincial people's congress representative, and hundreds of provincial people's congress representatives elect a NPC deputy, even if it is a NPC deputy , and more than 2,000 people (2018). The election of deputies to each level of the National People's Congress is conducted without direct communication with voters, and elections are only held every five years. In such an election, is the person elected really what the people want ? How can the people know which talent they want without adequate communication ? What can the people do when the elected man cannot satisfy the people ? Progressive self-organization can solve these problems.

(To be continued)

Download Link for "The Unity of Rights and Citizens":

Lan Qinyun: https://www.lanzous.com/b04g25iub

Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1C4knoRiDsAFvDHogwIY9V7BYrojFKj-y

You can change the world by reading this book (no kidding)