A new, multipolar political system. The Ideology FOR People.

About Revolutions, Liberty and People's Government.

Libya, Egypt, Syria... ? Are they 'democratic revolutions' or are they just more 'palace coups' in favour of the old-new power elite and an old-new tyranny?

Liberty were on the  Barricades only ...

The 'Russian October', José Martí, Comandante Che- they have all been surrounded by a golden aura of epic heroism and romance; however an outdated paradigm of governance dooms true freedom fighters to failure before they even start, and yet again everything turns full circle. But why?

The chief political nemesis of democracy and liberty is not so much capitalism, communism or any other ideology, but rather their monopolism and a system of autocratic rule with a fixed leadership in any of its masked forms, including the Libyan jamahiriya   (so-called 'direct democracy': 'Brownian ferment' of non-professionals under a professional 'puppet master').                                                             Were the tyrant-emperors Stalin, Mao and Ghaddafi guarantors of democracy?

Monopoly and someone's god-likeness already means lack of freedom for the rest.

By the way, and bipartisan political "duelling" is indeed a fascinating spectacle for the politically naive, and it does indeed distract from any kind of serious critique (dare we say "panem et circenses"?), but the winner is invariably in favour of the impresario, backed up by the money of the unwitting masses. What were once useful past political movements have degenerated into ruses. Now, with little effective difference in approach, the so-called "business model" connives at maintaining the financial status quo, the "Big Money", and is also cautious not to allow "strangers" into the powerful "club".

This is not democracy if we are to understand what Abraham Lincoln meant, that is to say "government of the people, by the people and for the people"!

The revolution is not so much about kalashnikovs and passionate rhetoric...              A revolution should be seen as a new stage of development, primarily a new  way of thinking and innovation in a system of social relations and governance. If it fails to do that then it is merely yet another ‘palace coup’ bringing grist to someone else's mill.

A new idea of a self-balancing government by, of and for the people, comprising several independent parties with a movable centre of joint decisions, would put an end to this discord and consolidate society. It would also open a new, evolutionary way of development without social turmoil and without political and economic cataclysms.

True Democracy and Liberty is here: A multipolar political system.

Which of the Ideologies and Government actually serves FOR People?

'DEMOCRATS' elect the MONARCH 'for a time'.    O Lord! Give them Sanity into the bargain!

A new ideology and political system which do not make people enemies and slaves.

When capitalism and communism will become an anachronism, the messiahs of new political religions will continue to convert 'lost sheeps' to their faith and to set them at loggerheads for the purpose of their own coronation. But the chronic error of oneidea'd freedom fighters provoking lovers of royal honors and arbitrary rule, will remain unchanged…

"Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana

The final goal of uncontrolled capitalism is clear: concentration of capital leads to a caste of “chosen by God” loafers, with unlimited possibilities, who use all others only as WORK HORSES and INTERMEDIATE STAGE[1] IN CAPITAL INCREASE. But the enormous quantity of what the rich, the people who run the mill, see as “unnecessary” people demands expensive social conditions, creates environmental problems, and even traffic jams.
But it is also socially highly explosive. So how do they get rid of humans whom they see as a waste, since machines have totally replaced them? Male sterilization? Step-by-step degeneration through unhealthy genetically modified food sold to the people via powerful advertising? Entrapment in local wars? Or Hitler-style death camps?

"We must increase the inequality between people by putting up impenetrable barriers.            There will be the class of masters and below them there will be an anonymous mob, always the lowest ones. Still further down, there will be the defeated modern slaves, the foreigners.                 And above all these will rise a new aristocratic class of which I can say nothing yet."  – Adolf Hitler

These two world orders are similar, are they not? Find you and your children's future in them, without self-deception.                                                                              In Russian culture there is a religious rite to close the eyes of the deceased by means of coins. The unlimited cult of money and greed can 'close the eyes' of all civilization in the end.

The euphoria of the national superiority imposed by Hitler, and a sobering hangover thereafter. The price of paranoia is war-ravaged Europe and over 60 million people, including Germans. The world were lucky that maniac failed to get a nuclear bomb.

But can it make sense for mankind to reject capitalism and money as a source of fraud, to claim that it is only a case of false superiority and oppression of one biological individual by another after the example of “communist’ Pol Pot[2] in Cambodia?

Drawn Paradise beckons as before, but he is far from reality ...

Deportation of the Crimean Tatars and other people has laid the foundations     of a future ethnic conflicts.	Return of the serfdom to village: collective farmers worked for 'a tick' and have been deprived civil passports.	Stalin Holodomor in Ukraine and Russia   in exchange for imported machine tools has killed over 6 million people.

Communist romantics Thomas More, Robert Owen, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Nikolay Chernyshevsky, "... to each, ACCORDING TO HIS NEEDS" ... A six-time convicted criminal, Joseph Dzhugashvili (Stalin) had right away understood what unlimited possibilities the imperfection of a new “religion for the sheep” called “Commune” opens for the Power maniacs: “The Great Helmsman” Mao, “The Greatest Genius of All Times and Peoples [3]” Stalin; enthusiasm in spite of eternal poverty and millions of victims deemed “enemies of the People” by “Communist tin gods” – emperors who were presumed to be the guardian angels of people’s needs and hopes?

The common man will remain an abandoned and defenseless orphan  under the uncontrollable domination of ANY caste of “god-like” rulers: whether they call themselves capitalists or communists. This will continue so long as the interests of each voter (be honest, his voice) does not become an object of rival attention of several parties in a  new multi-party model of government. And until actually done, work in exchange for the sympathies of voters doesn't become the sole condition of competitive survival in power those who are deprived the right of next pre-election advertizing.                                                                                     Only under this condition, can political parties not reign, but actually work for the people and you may rest assured in friendly and stable future for you and your children.

That is why in the political coup of 1991 the deceived and pauperized Russian people turned away from the communist “Fathers of the Nation”, who had 'forgotten' about the declared goals and severed the “umbilical cord” of voter feedback. The “partying” called ‘The Victory of Communism’ had turned out inevitably to be only for the elite, the ones who called themselves the “unselfish fighters”.

Kremlin ration, special customer service, gold spinners for fishing on Baikal,   the royal hunts in Zavidovo, etc.	Galina Brezhneva's diamonds & partyings	The 'living relic's' greeting     to the people.	It is the people. But this queue      is no longer to the Mausoleum.

What's remained from 'total equality' and other communist ideas?

Freedom fighters errors:

1. Monopoly of one political idea leads to the inevitable formation of a caste which serves it, to the cult of ‘The Supreme priest’ and to the alienation from the rest of society. The caste pursues the interests of the caste exclusively.

2. The monopoly idea creates an imbalance in the society, and retention of its domination demands regular disinformation (the lie) and physical violence in Soviet Russia, such as the Kronstadt rebellion[4] , the Gulags, Novocherkassk – June 1962′[5], Prague-68, the Iron Curtain, among other flagrant examples of rebellions dealt with in a horrendously repressive way.

3. Self-preservation of a monopoly and social privileges of the ‘high priests’ require the suppression of new ideas. The lack of renewal and of healthy competition leads to degeneration.

4. The unipolarity which controls autocracies leaves the possibility for shadow protectionism; corruption destroys the state from within. /Corruption can be minimized by means of cross-checking of several competing parties./

5. The traditional pyramid of power is too dependent on the personal qualities and political orientation of the leader and his “cheerleading group”: in Soviet Russia, from authoritarian Stalin, who built (do justice to it!) a socialist super state based on criminal rules, to shortsighted , idle talker Gorbachev[6], who betrayed the fates of millions by one weak-willed phrase to the kulak[7] werewolf and drunkard Yeltsin. That this pyramid is unstable and vulnerable was thus proved!

6. A new society begins with a reform of the means of power. Lenin was to have bequeathed not a successor, but an innovation in management; LEADERSHIP SHOULD BECOME MOVABLE inside a collective governance system (Counsil = Soviet), and right to it should be continuously contested!  ‘The development spiral’ returns to an obsolete level without a new system of management!

So Russia returned to monarchism; from a criminal idol[3] of the blissfully believers to an self-crowned two-headed mutant marauding on ruins of a post-Chernobyl Soviet Empire.

Political takeovers will occur as long as the egoism of one dominant point of view continues to strengthen the paranoia of a suppressed opposition through its arbitrariness or indifferent inactivity and pompous lack of talent. Today’s Russian marauders-swindlers were hatched out of the ‘moss-covered’ taboos and ‘bedsores’ of the communist Monopoly.

The concentration of power in any single hands is dangerous. Under whatever tempting fetish: communism, the rule of Big Money the super-nation according to Nazism, or the any other ‘ism’, will you entrust your future to the next charismatic, power-hungry maniac who will turn your reason into a zombie, and, with “bats in his belfry”, dispose of your destiny and life as it pleases him? – The traditional pyramid of autocracy allows it!

Racial, religious, economic and social speculative barriers and prejudices oppress and break the constructive potential of all society and lead to decadence. Generally speaking, is it wise let the destiny of the entire society be predetermined by only one party, which has frequently come to power by means of buffoonery, empty promises or fraud at the moment of the citizens’ very serious choice?

Finally, the reckless and speculative confrontation of the two ideological monopolies, imposed by the vanity of power-hungry men, call the survival of our entire civilization into question through the deadliness of modern weapons.

The 'Big Red Button' should not be in single hands!

The means to prevent this lie in a system of checks and balances which must be institutionalized within the power structure, consisting of several independent participants without the “divine right” of an all powerful “king of the world”, but rather with a center of joint decisions, which is subject to change at any time.

Communists say that there is no democracy under capitalism, and capitalists have the same complaint about communism. So what is true democracy? Democracy is when the political system creates conditions for tolerant coexistence and productive collaboration is made possible through real competition between different political ideologies in the process of joint work within a single team, with the freedom for the citizens to choose between them. And the ideology of consolidation and emulative creation should become dominating.              

The real revolution, as an innovation and a new stage of development, is here: The self-balancing MODEL of GOVERNMENT. The rest are futile “palace coups” within the confines of the outdated and dangerous concept of undivided authority and the domination of one political idea.

"And the battle is eternal [between you and me?] We can only dream of peace"? - Alexander Blok

Wisdom begins with the multi-polarity of views, and the true road is between the ideological extremes.

With thanks to Siv O’Neall (France), Mac McKinney (USA) and Nicolas Mottas (Greece) 

Сделано в России                                                      Nicholas Popov   2010

________________________________

Notes:

1. As the customers who pays for ALWAYS MAXIMUM POSSIBLE PROFIT under the importunate 'altruism' of advertising.

"Total equalizing" of intellects        according to Pol Pot.

2. The leader extreme-left Khmer Rouge Pol Pot has won the power in Cambodia in 1975. For accelerated transition to a fully classless society and “total equality” uncontrolled Pol Pot issued a decree on the abolition of money and blew up the national bank, so in one moment destroyed the entire economy of Cambodia. Cities as nurseries of evil, and the ancient culture were destroyed also. Political dissent and opposition were not permitted. Priests, doctors, scientists, teachers and all educated people were murdered. He entered an order that all residents must leave the city and move to the province to engage in agricultural activities. The "equal among equals", using the UNLIMITED POWER, deceitand the violence, it forced other "equals" to the slave labour for two bowls of rice soup per day and to dig their graves themselves. The combined effects of backbreaking toil, malnutrition, poor medical care, and perverted executions resulted in the deaths, according to different sources, from 20 to 40% of the Cambodian population. It’s the price of ideological speculation.                                                                        The one-man rule and a paranoia forms a dangerous mix!

3. Mythical genius and farsightedness of the ‘Father of all times and the people’ are based on a maniacal self-exaltation and on a banal plagiarism of another’s ideas.
Stalin has usurped Lenin’s idea of collective search and decision-making (council = Soviet) and has proclaimed itself as the genius by means of appropriation of a general opinion of dependent experts. The Stalin phrase “And what will marshal Zhukov say?” became ‘winged’. Immediately after the war “genius” has got rid of the talented and too popular strategist, exiling dangerous competitor from Moscow.
The former criminal did not possess a gift for a ingenuity and eloquence as a professional journalist Trotsky (It’s the reason of painful hostility to a main contender.) and therefore spoke slowly, carefully selecting words that did his speech of more weighty for the uninitiated.
“The Great Genius”, afraid of intellectual competition, has destroyed the whole of Russia’s intellectual elite that has lowered the standard of culture of a nation. Revolutionaries (including Leon Trotsky ) have not avoided this fate also.              Alas, it’s a cross for thinking people under any authoritarian regime ...

Stalin, using a Lenin blunder of a fixed leadership, has appropriated the power, has distorted and discredited noble plans of revolutionaries and laid the groundwork of a criminal degeneration and redivision of Russia. In particular, it has brought the collective property under an complete control (state capitalism), and has revived a serfdom in village that again has legalized alienation creator from means of production and results of its work. Today's marauders in power should be thankful to their "Progenitor" for "no man's" factories and collective farms.

4. The Kronstadt rebellion was an unsuccessful uprising of Soviet sailors, soldiers and civilians sparked by the reduction of bread rations, deterioration of an economic situation at the War Communism, the privilege and domination of Bolsheviks against the government of the early Russian SFSR in March 1921. Revolt has been suppressed, and its participants are executed or subjected to repression.

5. The Novocherkassk’s riots were a direct result by Nikita Khrushchev doubling the prices of meat and butter and reducing pay rates, as well as of shortages of food and provisions and the poor working conditions in the Novocherkassk Electric Locomotive Factory. This led to mass protests. In clashes with the authorities 25 people killed and and seven people received a death sentence.

6. With stubborn disregard of the needs of ordinary people by the ruling elite in pre-Gorbachev’s Russia the problem of price stabilization at incessant shortage of the goods had resolved by means of sale of highly profitable vodka. That accustomed population to hard drinking but withdrew away from him the “unnecessary” money and maintained the appearance of stability and wellbeing of the economic system. Gorbachev’s “well-meaning” antialcoholic campaign has strongly pressed on this perverted way of stabilization of economy without pre-emptive compensation by means of other goods. Thievish directors of shops and trading depots to took advantage of sharp growth of the amount of money in hands of the population and, under impotence of the weak leader and corrupted power, have aggravated deficiency of the goods by means of concealment and the subsequent reselling goods an exorbitant price. Clandestine manufacture and sale of false vodka from industrial alcohol also did a lot of money. That has redistributed money in society in favor of sticky-fingered people.

Yeltsin-Gorbachev: "Cede the throne to me!"

Brezhnev’s corruption and economic decline; the loss of ideals; as well as aggravation of lack of goods and deterioration of life of the simple people and growth of the shadow capital provoked by Gorbachev’s one-sided, ill-conceived decisions have completed disintegration of political system and have dethroned verbiage, fruitless Gorbachev himself. "Simplicity is worse than robbery." - this is especially true of a National Leader.

7. “kulak” – In pre- and post- revolutionary Russian village “kulak” called the wealthy peasant received a riches on the enslavement of his fellow villagers and which has hold of the whole rural community in one’s fist (depending on itself; the fist “tight-fisted” = “kulak” in Russian). They earned money by means of assignment of another’s work, resale and usury on enslaving terms. For disobedience and debts poor folk were punished by a fist the law. When joining to communist party Yeltsin has carefully hidden its social origin as the Kulak’s son.                                  

When against the background of Gorbachev’s helplessness resolute Yeltsin came to power, it has carried out a fraudulent privatization of national patrimony that has been created by selfless work and by victims of millions people,

A commander of genius.	For homeland!	Heroes - polar explorers, Chkalov, Stakhanov, Pasha Angelina...	DneproGES, Tselina,      BAM ...	Legendary 'Flying tank' designer.	The first   cosmonaut.

and has turned from “comrade” into “the noble owner”-”reformer”. Yeltsin tried to ban the Communist Party and has replaced communist monopoly on the kulak-bandit dominance. Each leader brings his mentality to society ...

   The common people have appeared deceived as usual …

The one more ideological speculation has ended and given way to the next. Whether for a long time?

... and new selfless, but with a short memory freedom fighters will continue to throw themselves under an tanks, paving way for a next mono-ideological tyranny and lie, and her ‘tin gods’ …

"The only thing we learn from history is that we never learn from history." - G. Hegel   

                                                                              It is a diagnosis for ever?

New political system and a multipolar model of government.

Self-balancing political system: new, multipolar model of government of 5 independent political parties with the movable centre joint decisions would direct energy of party leaders to benefit whole society.

...."As I would not be slave, so I would not be a master....... .........   ........     .........        This expresses my idea of democracy."                                                 Abraham Linkoln

"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."   - Woltaire

Self-balancing political system    is a further development of the idea of democracy (popular sovereignty and self-government), it is based on advantages of collective thinking and self-regulation as one of the most important laws of nature, is constructed on the feedbacks of internal checks and balances, and uses energy of equal and emulative collaboration of political movements for the good of the whole society.

Single-party predominance in all previous forms of government through inevitable caste egoism foists and accumulates misbalance in the whole society and economy, provokes crises and dangerous regime changes (political coups, dictatorship) and through the paranoia of power-hungry persons it causes wars. Concomitant subjective and irrational distributing and the using of resources; economic, social, racial and other discrimination create ‘hindrance to’ and suppresses constructive potential of other, larger part of society. Innate lopsidedness and prejudice of fixed one-party leadership dooms a society to never-ending skews, confrontations and violence thus becoming a defective and dangerous anachronism. It is his natural mode of operation!

Does the phrase "Winner take all" mean that the rest are "the losing party"? On which side will YOU find yourself?    Is it wise to give initiatives and decisions concerning the whole society to the one-sided point of view?              - Objectivity and justness cannot be unilateral!           

With the growing complexity of civilization, the democracy that uses a method of collective decision-making and that takes into account multilateral aspects of problems, would be more effective form of government a society. But the Athenian direct democracy of small communities (as well as E-democracy) and the usual representative democracy, are speculatively built on inertness, incompetence and the sympathies of a majority popoulation to phrasemongers and populists, doesn’t provide a professional component at selection of candidates for authorities and leads to amorphous structure of nonprofessionals (or leads to 'diluting' professionals in it) which will inevitably be subordinated to a more organized structure or strong leader, hidden or explicit. The overpopulated and badly controlled parliament, without well co-ordinated and equally competing compact formations, panders to passivity of the some and abuse of authority of the others. This makes traditional forms of democracy, like and anarchy, inefficient and nonviable, and returns her to still greater arbitrary rule and lawlessness of dictatorship in crisis times¹ (eg, Hitler and Reichstag in Germany or Bolsheviks and the Provisional Government in Russia).

A new, multipolar self-balancing model of government of 5 political parties with a movable centre of joint decisions would be better organized, more broad-minded, competently enterprising, protected by party’s sovereignty & by Collective intelligence and would fit into society more adequately. The five [view angles] make up the minimum for self-balance. 5-pointed star is a symbol wisdom and protection in power.

Odd quantity (5) of participants and ‘floating’ 2-advantage are necessary for flexible and prompt change of the leader² for the purpose of an exception of ideological tendentiousness, and for blocking a ‘bad’ decisions (for decision-making the initiator should make a compromise at least with one more participant, but their joint decision can be blocked by three other participants: the 2-votes advantage +1 = 1+1+1). The blockings mean that the question should be reconsidered from other positions or is closed till ‘the best of times’. But leadership can move only between 2 largest parties with the greatest quantity of voters in order to not to harm to the majority of the population. In so doing the threat of negative evaluation (see below) and competitive survival (someone will leave the team in any case) compels any of leaders not to forget about interests of another big part of voters. Three smallest parties, taking one direction or another, play a stabilizing role and enrich the accepted decisions by means interests of smallest groups of the population inclusive, as a most vulnerable from the same negative estimation. The minority party will be finally get the opportunity to earn their popularity by means of actual work done for the good of the society.

Such quantity of participants is already enough for extended field of variants and weighted decisions. The expansion of system is probably, but it worsens its controllability and rapidness. Besides, opposition parties ‘behind a fence’ are the necessary catalyst and a source of updating.

How works the SELF-BALANCING MODEL of GOVERNMENT?

The right to decisions doesn’t belong to anybody individually! Any party of five has the right of initiatives. The realization of suggestions impels seeking allies and go to compromises. The decision can be taken at the half of the votes. If the solution is blocked by another half, the right of the new edition and the 2-votes advantage go to the leader of the second (regarding the number of voters) party.
In case of repeated lock, either:

1. The 2-votes advantage on the current theme goes to the communicator with a new alternative, which is supported by at least one participant from each block. Or, by mutual agreement, the conflict can be resolved using an ordinary majority of votes with the participation of only thematic experts of 5 sides. The leader has the right to refuse the made decision.

2. Final lock. The one provoking regular locks loses the right for initiatives, the three least (for the number of voters) parties can be updated from a reserve.

The three least parties are not enough in order to take separate initiatives’. Control of “taken decision” is implemented by participants outside the resolution.

Two- or three party alliance, that exceeded half of all decisions and locks, may claim only for one place in the future team. The compulsory political party / educatee is “the entrance ticket” to the Elections for the ruling party, a ‘rookie’ may declare himself outside the Elections along with the mentor only. It is possible for a trainee to participate as an advisor. The team going to Power for the first time can not be reorganized from functionaries of the ruling parties.

Advertising of the ruling parties’ is prohibited, their campaign can be supported with the work done only, opposition may publish an unaccepted version through the mass media. The advertising campaign of new parties can not be financed from private sources and state funds are distributed equally among the contenders.

 The election in a new MODEL of GOVERNMENT.

A ballot paper has 2 columns: Ruling Parties in descending order by the realized solutions rate only (an initiator earns two points, partners receive one, lock withdraws one and two respectively) and new ones, each presents its three basic purposes. If the voter trusts a former “mon ami”, he puts “YES”; if not, then he selects the new one with the most needfull priorities. He also has the right to say “NO” to the most negative of the ruling parties. The negative evaluation may take away up to half of the positive votes. The final grade of the “Old Fighters” in the elections is different between “FOR” and “AGAINST” votes, multiplied by the efficiency index (the ratio between implemented decisions and all the decisions taken) and the average objectivity index (the ratio of the parties who made the decision to their total number of 5). The parties not involved into decision making will have the objectivity index 1. For the party of lowest participation, its protege and a free candidate, the results will be increased by the reverse usefulness index (that is a ratio of a difference “FOR” votes “AGAINST” votes to “FOR” votes) of the leading four. If the usefulness index of the outsider is higher* than the average index of the four, the outsider gets two vacancies in the new team for the outsider itself and its educatee.

The voter is free to include one own candidate. Attention: this candidate is an indicator of an openness and democratic character of the power! The “dark horse” of a majority of voters has a guaranteed place in the following government if this is not challenged by a number of voices from a useful* outsider! Two compulsory vacancies in the new government for the current ruling parties are a guarantee of the accumulation of experience and the continuity of power. Counting of votes should occur only during the live broadcast.

Elections are supervised by 3 sides: the party of the lowest participation in the decision making, one of four other ruling parties chosen by lot, and any of the new ones, also by lot, except the trainees of already selected observers. When levelling the voters’ number “the 2-vote advantage” must not be associated with the leaders of the two largest parties alone.

The new Model and five Independents in Power means: freedom of initiatives and emulativeness; shrewdness; extended field of variants and balance of the decisions; mutual control; continuity in the policy and the openness to renewal!                      A minimum of participants and stages makes the decision-making process dynamic and manageable.

The new political system can minimize eternal problems of the power such as corruption, infringement of the rights and freedom under the imperfect legislation, etc. They are solved by cross check of several competing parties within the multi-polar government: the blunders of the contender raise chances of a survival in the power of other participants. The health-enhancing competition of political movements can benefit to all of society.

... Stalin had not been allowed to "miss the boat" of Hitler's invasion, there would not have been "condition for" and fatal consequences of "the messiah syndrome", Breznev stagnation, Cold and Hot Wars (Vietnam) and "Khrushchev's Shoe" ...                                                                                                                                            And let the Kremlin's star light up!

With thanks to Nicolas Mottas (Greece) 

Сделано в России                                                      Nicholas Popov   2011

1. Destructive radicalism finds mass support and becomes ever more dangerous with the approach of the      New Troubles.
2. This also rectifies a possible error of a choice of the majority of voters.

Free-reprint article.                Redirection with Wordpress.com "New political system."

See also  Wikipedia: Polarity in international relations

Some explainations for a new MODEL of GOVERNMENT.

Letter to Founder and Writer of LeftandRightNews.com   Monday, 4 April, 2011

Daniel

I suspected that the compressed description of work of this mechanism will be difficult to be perceived. This self-balancing system is constructed on an inventive feedbacks. The right of decisions doesn’t belong to anybody individually that is a departing point for objectivity.

Five participants are minimally necessary quantity for self-balance. For decision-making the initiator should make a compromise at least with one more participant, but their joint decision can be blocked by three other participants (the 2-votes advantage +1 = 1 +1+1). This is due to the need to blocking paranoid, unbalanced decisions. The minimum quantity of participants equal five follows from hence.

Coalitions can’t be continual: “Two- or three party alliance, that exceeded half of all decisions and locks*, may claim only for one place in the future team.” It forces to change a supporters or to expand their quantity that contributes to a multilateral decisions. Under these circumstances the leading coalition should be far-sightedly tolerant to opposition: priorities and an alignment of forces can change.                                                   * This regulator is wittily movable, come to think of it.

Floating 2-votes advantage allows opportunely to change the leader and to adjust the course more to the left or more to the right depending on the mood of society, without waiting for the next election or coup. Three minor parties performs the function of a stabilizer, as the most vulnerable from a negative estimation of voters, and enriches decisions, doing them more well-founded. Small opposition parties will get an opportunity to bring the maximum advantage.
Besides, this cuts a paranoia down to size and disposes to constructivity.

The "five-pointed star" is regularly updated at the expense of a rating career within the system, trainees and completely ‘fresh blood’ – a ‘dark horse’** of voters, that unites professionalism and freshness approaches in a new governance system.          **  This people's candidate is an indicator of the democratic character and openness of a new model of government.

This inventive scheme needs more attentive analysis. English National Liberals have sent my articles to European Third Way ‘think-tank’. "As they are philosophically based I will be sending this to the Third Way 'think-tank' www.thirdway.eu for a possible article on your works. Incidentally your five-pointed star is similar to our idea of an extended coalition in power."
Can experts of a ‘think tank’ to discern artful design of hidden feedbacks or they will put my article aside as a toy? But it is not a toy. “The 5-Pointed Star” carry new philosophy to society. It is philosophy of commonsense and consolidation.
As the governance system it is more sane, flexible and more effective than its predecessors.

This system is very simple if to understand a principle of its work once. But your answer suggests to me that I can’t find allies for advancement of perspective idea until I won’t explain principles of its work in more detail.

Nicholas

National Liberal Party (UK): Russia – Commonsense Will Conquer!

 Date:  April 24, 2011        The redirection from the site  wordpress.com

Whilst National Liberalism was once an important idea in 19th/20th Europe it is only now being rediscovered as an answer to issues of good governance. All around the globe we are beginning to see ‘green shoots’ of the idea taking root.

One such area is Russia, a country that threw off the shackles of Communism only to embrace a capitalism that primarily serves the rich and powerful. Whilst elections take place, it has fast become another ‘one party’ state. Not all however are prepared to accept the status-quo…

http://nationalliberal.org/?p=2231

Whether only Russia needs Commonsense?