Read this when the world goes to sh#! - and it is kind of already: Too many regulations, too much government, not enough freedom. And my solution is..

The westminster system of representative government is failing. Having originated in the post-feudal world of the 17th century, the westminster system as most western democracies know it originated from the same events as the westphalian notions of personal (and national) soverienty that arose from the English Civil War and concurrent Wars of the Roses, and other wars in Europe of the same period. In turn these perhaps formed part of the chain of developing thought that came from post-renaissance ideas of humanism that grew into the enlightenment.

But throughout that time and remaining the case today is that the notion of power to the people has been embedded in representative government or some form of representation. Whether it is in democracies that elect their parliamentarians or more authoritarian structures that nominate their decision makers, the outcome appears very obviously similar. The majority of people who are affected by the decisions have very little say in those decisions.

The veneer of civilization is often coated with the similarly fragile veneer of sovereignty. In every political system around the world, whether more democratic or less, all are bloated by a bureacracy that is used to justify the existence of entities that are taking from the populace. The law-making process is either entirely or at least pre-dominantly dealt with by bureacratic elements, such as policy makers, policy advisors, and administrative staff. This is at the heart of the political apparatus, and over time irrespective of the political ideologies, the political machine becomes so bloated it corrupts its own purpose and intention.

The closer it gets to absolute power the more it gravitates towards it. The rulers must rule over the ruled. The aristocratic ruling class of the last millenium has in turn been transformed into a burearatic class that lives and acts much in the same way as its regal predecessors. And over time the bloated system does collapse on itself. It does that through its own inertia. This has happened time and time again throughout history. Every empire and civilization that has risen and fallen shows this.

The faster it takes power away from the populace and centralizes power that critical mass growing to a point of being unsustainable, a collapse and reversal occurs. This was the case with the Egyptian Empire, the Persian Empire, the Roman Empire, the Abbasid Caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, the French Empire, the British Empire, soon to be the American Empire and countless other empires who have followed similar paths.

They may fall somewhere on the spectrum of deflating gradually or collapsing fantastically, but they all fell victims of their own successes. And they all saw an increase in the "state", the "court", the bureacracy of which there was no real productive purpose, no actual generation of goods or services that the populace wished to consume. The solution or solutions, from where we are at now, just don't seem to be there.

The idea of popular politics does not give an actual solution or set of solutions, only an alternative that gives some freedoms back to the people, but the system is ultimately the same. There will always be people discontented with whatever system exists because there will always be people at the bottom of the pecking order.

But the mechanisms to achieve fairness and opportunity have shifted away from the majority of people in recent years, in most advanced societies. The idealogical appeal of capitalism, democracy, freedom are tainted by their own nonclemature. The idea of capitalism, the word itself is tainted by the idea that only some of us are capitalists, in fact, fewer and fewer, while the rest have very little capital.

The ideas of democracy are today that democratic notions are clouded by bureacracy and decision makers with executive decision making delegated from parliamentarians, removed from the actual representation of the populace. But I have a simpler solution. Dissolve the westminister system and the bureacracy. i.e. pass laws to remove the majority of laws. Pass just a few laws that give municipal, local or community decision making and allow local communities to pass laws for themselves.

Where issues are larger than the community - and I am sure the big government advocates will say - and what about the bigger matters they need to be dealt at state and national levels... have a voluntary system of voting by local communities on decisions and agreement with other adjoining communities.

This would require less than 10% of the current staff and budgeting, representatives would not need to be politicians, we could slash government budgets by 90%, and we would actually have deflation and that would be a good thing. Inflation only benefits the rich, the government and people who have assets. In this proposed system, the appointed leaders, just ask questions to be decided on and the communities decide on them. It won't require leaders in the contemporary sense, because people will raise issues and put them forward for "polling" and people will vote on what needs to be done. In small non-bureacractic businesses, this works and it works really well.

This would also set the basis for a voluntary donation system, or voluntary taxation, because in this scenario, we are living in a post-tax and post-government environment. I would be happy to donate 10% or 20% of pay at any given time to make sure my child is safe and being educated, not being told what to do.

There is a reason why in every industry where there is government, there is also a private sector or volunteer sector. Even, with police and military there are private security and mercenary forces. And as was pointed out to me by a friend recently, even Fire Departments are augmented by rural and volunteer firefighter services, worthy of existing and worth of community funding and donations.

But the electoral commission? Really? What a glorious waste of human cell matter. We could be so much more commonsense and remove all of these useless and wasteful government departments. Let's have a vote on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation? See if more people than not vote on it. Repatriate the $2 billion dollars a year back to the people.

Why have an ever growing Tax collection department when the largest corporations and richest people, including politicians - are able to offshore their wealth and not pay taxes? Why have the Tax man contact you, being paid by you, to tell you what to do with 20-40% of the money you earn?

Then you get to see it wasted on things that you would not vote for or ever want - irrespective of which political party you voted for or what they claim to believe in.

The suggestion here is that a simple system without lengthy laws, with no centralization of authority, but decision making and power made by each community will yield much better, much fairer, much more commonsense results. This will potentially happen anyway, irrespective of what we do today, because empires, empircal systems (or rather the political industrial complex that is our society today) will fragment, just as all systems do when they get too big.

This is a mathematical construct, and mathematical certainty. Seen in nature and seen in the universe. Locust swarms devour everything until they have no food and then die out. Asset bubbles grow until the return on the asset is no longer viable and they pop or deflate. Nation states' debase their currency until as in the case of the Romans - the visigoths get their final win - and the system collapses. Even in space, critical mass occurs and stars, planetary systems, other phenomena grow until they cannot sustain themselves and their critical mass as a whole decelerates.

It is a constant state of shifting equilibrium. We as atomic albeit sentient creatures are not exempt from the laws of the universe. But at least by giving power to communities, to locales, to small groups of people, they can make decisions for themselves that affect their lives. What is relevant to someone in small town Nebraska, is not relevant, even thought of in Washington D.C. The same can be said for rural or small town England to the bustle of London. The same applies in every country and every community around the world. A system that is simple and decided upon by the people who are going to be affected by the decisions made in that that system is not only a fair outcome, but a commonsense one. It works for the majority of people for a majority of the time.

This suggested system would be so much more efficient, but unfortunately it won't happen, there are too many Executive Officers in Government Departments earning $400,000 per year who can't justify what they are actually doing but will tell us the current system is working and we have stablity so don't change it. But then look at the cost of living, inflation of all goods, especially food and homes. The "money" is no longer equating to the production in our society and it will only get worse. Maybe someone will remember this or unknowingly replicate the suggestions in this article when this system collapses on itself.

The veneer of civilization is often coated with the similarly fragile veneer of sovereignty.

I did not write this with A.I. at all. All my own thoughts.

Frank Brun.