FM-2030: What is the Future of Democracy? Part 1

FM-2030: What is the Future of Democracy? Part 1


FM-2030: “Representative democracy or what is in Europe called Parliamentary democracy.” “Is considered by a lot of enlightened, progressive individuals as the most advanced, the most refine, the most Democratic system we have.” “In this late 20th century, representative democracy: is antiquated, it’s obsolete, it’s undemocratic, it is authoritarian, mire with rotten old values.” “This is not to say that the alternative is autocracy or authoritarian systems.” “They are even more black-hole than the past.” “The imbalance is even greater and more grotesque.” “But, let us not delude ourselves. We do not have representative systems anywhere on the planet.” “Representative democracy is a system that is based on leadership.” “And leadership is itself intrinsically authoritarian.” “Once you set up leaders and followers, you create imbalances in power, cults of personality, extreme, vicious competitiveness.” “Anybody who’s watched the candidates who are running for office can see it.” “Now, in all fairness, we do know this competitiveness exists at all areas of our societies.” “Who’s the best kid? Who’s the fastest kid?” “Who’s Miss America? Who’s Mr. This and Who’s Mr. That?” “This is a society made of a few winners and a whole lot of losers.” “And this is exactly how our politics are run!” “Who attracts the most votes. That is not the issue! The issue is issue.” “We ought to be voting on issues, not for people.” “Don’t vote for me! I don’t want to vote for you!” “Leadership. What does it presume?” “That the leader has something that you and I do not have” “At one time this was true; the leader had access to information.” “This kind of a talk would have really meant nothing 30 years ago.” “Why not? Because we did not have the technology for it.” “Decision-making processes depend heavily on the technology of the times within which they operate.” “When we had primitive technologies, our decision-making processes were inevitably authoritarian in one way.” “If you were down in Nebraska somewhere, and the decision- making process was in Washington DC. You had to have someone there to speak for you.” “But today, you pick up your telephone, you pick up your interactive system, your terminal.” “At a time when technology, when telecommunication is increasingly interactive, decentralized. What excuse is there?” “We are better informed often than those people called leaders or representatives.” “Everyone has access to information.” “Representative Democracy: it is too inefficient, too slow for our times.” “We have to always wait for the next elections. Over, and over, and over again you hear the next elections.” “Which means having to put a lot of controversial things in freeze. It is a very, very slow and inefficient process.” “100 years ago, 200 years ago it didn’t matter. So you wait four years, you wait fives years, you wait ten years, it doesn’t really matter.” “In a hyper rapid world, in a rapidly converging world where decisions needs to be made continuously” “It does cause individuals to shift to a certain passivity.” “If I’m not very happy with you, four years later I’ll throw you out.” “We don’t have time to wait. Can the world wait every four years?” “We don’t have to go through the indirect. We have rapid, universal, personal telecommunication systems.” “The component parts for the infrastructure for this new, electronic democracy.” “The shift from the old corrupting to something infinitely more democractic.” “A world that is less torn by domination and submission.” “I see a shift. I see it happening everyday.” “The increasing emphasis on referendums.” “The increasing resort to public opinion polls.” “Now, I am not naive enough to believe that tomorrow we are going to close down the White House.” “All these little Senates and all these little Congresses around the country and say,”Hey listen, we’re going to shift to a whole new system.” “That’s not how things work.” “You notice, for instance, that the British monarchy has already become highly obsolete than opera-comique.” “But it exists. In part because of inertia and this is what I see happening.” “An obsolescence that I see inevitably seeping into the American political system.” “The thing is here; there are two ways of going about it.” “The question that crystallizes in my head is: are the people who are admired in all systems the ones who are going to help faze out their obsolescence? “It just goes counter to human nature.” “If you are heavily vested into some infrastructure or in some system, you’re not going to faze out your own involvement.” “For people who do not have the patience to wait, we don’t have to wait for this massive infrastructural change.” “The initiatives, the forces for change are all outside of politics.” “You have the environment, the times are right,the technology is right. You have a lovely opportunity to work outside of the old systems.” “We need not leaders. We do not need representatives. We need catalysts.”

9 Comments on "FM-2030: What is the Future of Democracy? Part 1"


  1. I wonder what FM would have made of futurist geeks who think that monarchy deserves a second look as democracy collapses because it has consumed the capital built up during the industrial revolution. 

    Reply

  2. Wish I could have been at that meeting…  I suggest a solutocracy – a system based on solving problems, not passing "laws."  For more on a solutocracy and how, rather than assigning a "leader" to solve all issues, leaders of the moment emerge for any problem, please visit My forum:

    T.A.P. – You're It!
    http://tapyoureit.boards.net

    “Revolution in ideas, not blood.”

    ♥♥♥

    “Did You give an oath and find it’s bait and switch?  Well, there is no oath then, is there?”
    "ALL money systems promote the most psychopathic to the top of the money/power heap – THEY will do ANYTHING to get there."
    "The love of money is the root of all evil; remove the soil in which the root grows…"
    "If the universe is made of mostly "dark" energy…can We use it to run Our cars?"
    "If You want peace, take the PROFIT out of war."

    Reply

  3. The facade offers a safety net for people who do not (or can not) chose to take action. This does not mean action does not need to take place. How? The relevance on issues instead of leaders seems to be a strong argument.

    Reply

  4. Loved part 2 so i was excited to see part one. Very visual graphics to this. if everyone has access to information, then why is the government so secretive and not always honest with the people regarding what they do? I do not not like this video as much as part 2. we need to focus on what the real issues are and then decided who can lead us on the right path

    Reply

  5. WoW! I really wish for this guy to comeback to the future so I can get a the honor to have discussion with him. He was born before his time. Also What do you make your videos with man? the animations are quite cool.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *