p22dem metaII

Meta-Democracy II

By John Taylor; 2008 March 14, 13 Ala, 164 BE

"Beloved Pan, and all ye other gods who haunt this place, give me beauty in the inward soul; and may the outward and inward man be at one. May I reckon the wise to be the wealthy, and may I have such a quantity of gold as a temperate man and he only can bear and carry." (Plato, Phaedrus)

On July 29, 2006, I wrote an essay called Meta-Democracy, which I closed with this prayer of Socrates for integrity. I could not resist opening this second installment, designed to flesh out the idea of meta-democracy that I broached then, with the same prayer. I notice that Socrates' supplication seems addressed not only to the lesser gods of local government but also to the god of universality, Pan. Socrates, Baha'u'llah affirms in the Lawh-i-Hikmat, believed in one God. If so, this prayer encourages us to think of God as concerned with both local and universal governance.

Socrates prays to be able to perceive wisdom -- recall that wisdom is the characteristic virtue of governance, as defined by Plato elsewhere. If so, this is also a prayer for the perception that a voter needs in choosing a leader. Socrates prays not only for wisdom but also temperance, to be protected from the desire to profit beyond a moderate amount. Both wisdom and temperance are essential to polity, rule by all on behalf of all. Polity, like God, serves the local and planetary levels at once. The leadership of a polity aims at both local and planetary good at the same time, and for that reason it promotes the trust between rulers and people that the Universal House noted recently is rapidly breaking down.

"One of the signs of the breakdown of society in all parts of the world is the erosion of trust and collaboration between the individual and the institutions of governance." (UHJ, Message to the Baha'is of the World, 25 March 2007)

This trust is openly attacked every day by promoters of unfettered capitalism; they insinuate instead a rabid form of individualism and a twisted, isolated idea of liberty. Most of all, they worship at the shrine of Mammon. If there be any doubt about how important it is to be safe from greed, Baha'u'llah affirms this in no uncertain terms in the following, where he compares it to the eye's lens cap, the eyelid. Greed similarly blocks out our inner vision.

"O children of understanding! If the eyelid, however delicate, can deprive man's outer eye from beholding the world and all that is therein, consider then what would be wrought if the veil of covetousness were to descend upon his inner eye. Say: O people! The darkness of greed and envy becloudeth the radiance of the soul even as the clouds obstruct the light of the sun. Should anyone hearken unto this utterance with a discerning ear, he will unfurl the wings of detachment and soar effortlessly in the atmosphere of true understanding." (Tabernacle, 4)

We have been looking lately at Naomi Klein's, "The Shock Doctrine: the rise of disaster capitalism," which documents the triumph of bald greed on the international stage. The economists of the Chicago school (every time I read about their activities I think of the Nakazin whose betrayal so saddened the Master during his visits to that city at America's heart of darkness) promote a culture of open and unabashed acquisitiveness. Worse, every advertisement we are exposed to is a more or less subliminal appeal to some selfish motive. If you want to find new things to be horny for, should you want the reverse of Socrates prayer, just sit back and watch some commercial television or read the ads in a magazine, and tares will be planted deep in the soil of your heart. The same cleverness that designs this flood of corporatist propaganda also plots to subvert democratic movements around the world. The following passage from Klein's book comes after her history of how a cadre of globe hopping experts strangled the babe of South African liberation at its birth. It is, in my opinion, the most important passage in the entire book so far.

"If Moscow had given in, how could a raggedy band of freedom fighters in South Africa resist such a forceful global tide? That, at least was the message being peddled by the lawyers, economists and social workers who made up the rapidly expanding `transition' industry -- the teams of experts who hop from war-torn country to crisis-racked city, regaling overwhelmed new politicians with the latest best practice from Buenos Aires, the most inspiring success story from Warsaw, the most fearsome roar from the Asian Tigers. `Transitionologist' (as the NYU political scientist Stephan Cohen has called them) have a built-in advantage over the politicians they advise: they are a hyper-mobile class, while the leaders of liberation movements are inherently inward-looking. By their very nature, people spearheading intense national transformations are unable to pay close attention to the world beyond their borders. That is unfortunate, because if the ANC leadership had been able to cut through the transitionology spin and find out for itself what was really going on in Moscow, Warsaw, Buenos Aires and Seoul, it would have seen a very different picture." (Shock Doctrine, 260-261)

The reason I think this is so important is that it suggests how a polity can counteract this locust attack by well-heeled, well-traveled liars and thieves. First of all, a world government must establish meta-democracy, not only political but first of all professional. The afternoon of the fast is fast upon me, so I will go into what I mean by that next time. In the meantime, here is the relevant part of the first installment of Meta-democracy.

 Metademocracy, Part I

"So also, when the head of the army is unrivaled in the art of war, in what he says and commands he does what he wishes. When the captain of a ship is proficient in the art of navigation, in whatever he says and commands he does what he wishes. And as the real educator is the Perfect Man, in whatever He says and commands He does what He wishes. "In short, the meaning of `He doeth whatsoever He willeth' is that if the Manifestation says something, or gives a command, or performs an action, and believers do not understand its wisdom, they still ought not to oppose it by a single thought, seeking to know why He spoke so, or why He did such a thing." (Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, 174)

In this passage too there is more than meets the eye. Here I see the next step in the evolution of democracy. The Master is more or less commenting on certain passages in Plato that deal with the captain of the ship, that is, the expert in command. Like an army, a ship's captain makes life and death decisions for everybody on board, and it is suicidal to question his authority, especially during a storm, the crisis period when lives are most in danger. Very few philosophers understand what Plato was after by his ship's captain comparisons, they say he was a philosopher and naturally he was all for the leadership of a philosopher king. They make that mistake because they have not factored in the above commentary by the Master.

In any case, the next step in democratic evolution is what I am going to call multi-tiered meritocratic elections. This is modeled by the administration of the Baha'i Faith. Basic to this is the understanding that no longer can power safely rest in the hands of just one expert. Many heads are better and -- most to the point -- more incorruptible than one. Notwithstanding, day to day operations of the National Spiritual Assembly are still put in the hands of a general secretary, whom the UHJ compares to a CEO in relation to a corporation's board of directors.

Thus a philosopher king in this age works on, through, and is responsible to a committee. In the Baha'i order, only a Divine Manifestation can take absolute power into the hands of one individual; and then look at how much He suffers!

Other derivative principles of Baha'i administration come out of this. You know the drill. Instead of nominations, we have multi-level elections. On a national level, we vote in delegates and they vote in the National Spiritual Assembly; they in turn elect the UHJ. Elections are silent, free of campaigning or electioneering, and open to any member of the Faith in the jurisdiction. Electing electors is a startlingly original innovation! Call it "meta-democracy."

As a sort of scientific addendum to this faith model, compare the discoveries reported in Surowiecki's "Wisdom of Crowds" of how under the right conditions large numbers of people, voting freely and openly, always make the best possible guess about partial unknowns. Enough people have read that book now, since journalists routinely report popular guesses about who will win elections and sports events.

Although I do not follow sports normally, early this spring I read that the popular choice to win the World Cup of Soccer this summer was Italy. Following events sporadically and being around soccer fans now that my kids are playing it, I could have easily won some bets as to who would win the tournament based upon that astonishingly dependable popular prediction.

Surowiecki's is surely a revolutionary finding about how human intelligence is amplified by a combination of mathematical averaging and free, unbiased elections.

Combined with the above Baha'i-Platonic model, a meta-democracy that takes advantage of crowd wisdom will surely make decisive changes to future governance. I see the day coming when highly technical decisions will be decided "multi-tier democratically," completely independently of bureaucratic setups, simply by taking guess votes, by setting opinion "stock exchanges" where those concerned bet on certain outcomes, and at a certain stage by having all the experts in the area vote in committees of experts who in turn would appoint executives and trustees to carry out the daily operations of the project.

Let us say that our town wants to know whether to build a wind tower or a solar collector in a given location. That is a perfect job for local decision making. The usual questions that come up are: who is to decide? Who is to pay? What is lost? What long term effects will this have on the environment? Who benefits? How much should we allocate for this task? If you want to know the answer to these confusing and mutually contradictory questions, read Jane Jacobs' chapter in Dark Age Ahead on "Dumbed Down Taxes."

Here is a work of genius if ever I saw one.

Jacobs' thesis is simple but powerful. Europe recovered from the Dark Ages that set in after the fall of the Roman Empire by instituting local fiscal principles of subsidiarity and fiscal accountability.

"Subsidiarity is the principle that government works best -- most responsibly and responsively -- when it is closest to the people it serves and the needs it addresses. Fiscal accountability is the principle that institutions collecting and disbursing taxes work most responsibly when they are transparent to those providing the money." (Jane Jacobs, Dark Age, 103)

She carries this forward in the chapter to a climactic interview with then Prime Minister Paul Martin, himself a known financial (though not necessarily political or moral) genius. The way she demolishes his arguments and sees behind his motives is a tour de force to behold, her finest hour. A while back I spent a great deal of time studying the Canadian constitution, but I never noticed what she points out is *not* in there, the above two basic fiscal principles of responsible, responsive government. Amazing. These twin principles should and must be put into every constitution; after all, they got the world out of the Dark Ages...