Genesis of Eden

Genesis Home

Transformative Democracies and Global Dynamical Systems

The subject of this discussion is how to provide a new ecosystemic model for democracy and to conceive dynamical transformative democracies which could correct through natural dynamical adjustments, the deficiencies of the winner-take-all strategies of venture capital exploitation and reverse erosion of democracy, due to the rise of trans-national corporations with global agendas and investment treaties which vest unacceptable power in un-elected non-democratic global business and investment instruments. This pattern of exploitive investment competing to take advantage of all remaining natural resources is a direct threat to biodiversity planet-wide. It is likewise contrary to any grass-roots move to establish the future ecosystemic society upon which we will have to depend for a sustainable existence.

This qualitative and quantitative erosion of democracy is both devastating to the future sustainability of the planet and as contrary to the interests of the people in the very developed countries which are the source of the intiative as it is to people in under developed countries who become exploited by the undemocratic investment initiaitves of the developed world.

The myth of the free-market is that the lean mean world of competition is a more ecosystemically efficient system than any regulated economy . This has a tragic flaw. Ecosystems are conserved sustainably because all surviving organisms have a genetic imprint of their entire evolutionary history. They are survivors in a surviving biosphere.

Companies are essentially different. They have a non-genetic charter which determines only how they hold meetings, nothing about their evolutionary niche. They are non-democratic. Their directors are generally only financially accountable to the shareholders, not strategically accountable. They are completely non-accountable to the human and natural environments in which they operate, consumer, worker alike and affected citizen alike. They are unstable dynamical systems striving to exploit resources more quickly than their competitors and capable of liquidating their assets and changing their strategic identity and line of business if they exploit and destroy a given resource.

The aim of this discussion is to reintroduce genetic algorithms into society the world economy and law so that the world ecological economy can become a truly ecosystemic entity which is sustainable in the long term.


The major dynamical feedbacks in global political desicion-making

Political and Economic Dynamics and Sustainable Society: In terns of environmental health, the planet is a dynamical system driven by at least four major factors: (a) the 200 or so national governments some democratically elected some otherwise, (b) multi-national corporations, (c) the globalist influence of the UN and its bodies such as UNEP etc.and NGOs, (d) the 'North-South' dialogue between developed energy-hungry countries and developing energy-lean countries, which also possess a large proportion of the genetic resources of the planet. See also Avoiding Genetic Holocaust

The retreat of government from from economic autonomy to an unregulated free-market has eroded the power of electoral democracies over their own social and economic future. While the power of political electorates is regional, investment has become transnationally global.

The same deregulated conditions which encourage transnational investment by the same measure encourage global transformative democracies. These provide an opportunity to redress the loss of democratic autonomy, by providing a means for the whole of human society to cooperatively deal with the ethical decisions required to provide a sustainable future for all of us.

A Non-profit Reverse-takeover: Ethicorporates

What is needed is to add further feedbacks to this system which will help to correct its instabilities. One possible item is a new form of ethical non-profit organization which does have the required characteristics and can in a fundamental sense out-compete multi-nationals at their own game.

It is common in Darwinist evolutionary theory to set up simple game theoretic models of a situation to test whether a given stragegy is really Dawwinian - i.e. an evolutionary stable strategy. These games often have cooperators and defectors. For example a gender game might consist of faithful husbands, wild oat sowers, good wives and sacred whores - i.e. free women. Such games can lead to equilibrium or take-over.

In theory all companies are diseased organisms because the profit motive acts like a vampire, sucking capital out in terms of dividends to the investor. This means that a non-profit possessing the same capital would naturally out-grow a profit-making competitor because all funds could be ploughed back into growth. Of course this is unrealistic, because investors want a return on their capital. However an investor is well-advised to spread their portfolio.

Financial investment is to ensure future abundance in real life terms. However investment is made as much in future options as liquidity. Insurance is an example of this. A financial loss is incurred in premiums in return for a changed quality of life in relation to certain contingencies. Likewise a non-profit organization which further ethical principles which help to ensure the future of the contributor act as a good form of insurance.

Some people contribute to environmental and consumer protest organizations on this basis. So the idea is to design a new form of ethicorporate which forms a cooperative transaction between members, management, consumer and workers in which the dynamics is based on participatory democracy, the genetic identity of a covenent of ethical intent about the operations and purpose of the organization.

In principle such ethicorporates could function competitively in the commercial environment providing services, possibly with special considerations for members, depending on their constitutions.

Constitution, Incorporation and Democracy

Both multi-national corporations and political democracies are founded on the concept of the charter of association, which determines how the executive is elected and how democracy of management and members proceeds. Changes in concept of charters of association can thus dramatically change the face of the world by changing the principles of both the corporate and political worlds.

Transformative Democracies

In seeking liberation into a just world, we turn to varying forms of democracy as our favoured sanctuary from the imprisonment of totalitarian rule. However democracy itself is limited and can cause tyranny to minority diversity. In seeking social change in the face of world exploitation, pollution and militarization, it is natural to look for new forms of democracy which could have a transformative effect on society.

Many political and environmental parties and organizations are transformative democracies in this sense. Political and environmental protest organizations are essential, but only act on a single level of transformation and get parried and obstructed by political resistance. For example Greenpeace has activities on the nuclear front through to biodiversity. It has done very good things e.g. about drift net fishing whaling, and nuclear and environmental protest, but nuclear weapons remain, Pakistan is defiant, the forests still burn. The feminist movement has made controversial strides in the US and Europe yet women remain in bondage in much of the world. Other movements like Amnesty try to deal with social injustice in similar terms with similar small successes often blocked by autocratic intransigence. On the other side, spiritual groups try to make a change of consciousness without necessarilty changing world politics or the social order. Religious and spiritual movements do have great potential to make a change of heart and consciousness, but are mostly in new age 'niche markets' or are 'archaic mythologies' often reinforcing the patriarchy. They have limited influence on the rape of the 'business as usual' scenario.

Part of this problem comes from the relatively typecast nature of these movements as 'dynamical systems'. World Dynamical Systems We can conceive of the world as a dynamical feedback system consisting of regional world governments, transnational investment, UN and bodies, and various NGOs interacting in feedback loops with the regional economies, environment and populations throught regulation, litigation, election, commercial opportunity, trade and media comment exposure and protest. A catalytic way of 'subverting' this world dynamical system to bring in an ecosystemic world order is to introduce completely new organisms into the 'free market' which have new transformative properties and can reproduce or inflate until they transform the world order, not by revolution (which may meet violent confrontation) but re-evolution - a new ecosystemic dynamic.

Profit and the Blood

For example, since transnationals have to return profit to investors, they are like bleeding organisms. Such corporate entities are accountable only to investors (indirectly) and have no covenant with consumers, workers or society as whole. They are thus non-genetic entities operating in a supposedly ecosystem-like 'free market'. The lack of genetic principles in company law is fatal to the model. A dedicated ethical non-profit should be able to outcompete such an entity provided another reason exists for investors to input capital. With non-profits this is generally the 'purpose' e.g. cancer research. Purpose-related investment, not for immediate profit but for the beneficial results that flow, is a valid form of qualitative investment which is common to the symbiotic aspects of mature ecosystems. A sustainable world will not come from winner-take-all greed, so commerical profit leads to desertification and boom-bust investment failures. This is not good long-term investment foir living human investors because all the measures lead to attrition of economic and health quality, violating the genetic paradigm. The free market needs to become more genetic in a variety of ways which include competing transformative non-profits.

Generative Democracies

A second feature of democracies which give them added transformative power is the concept of being generative. Many explosive political movements are generative because they start out small with a few members and a transformative agenda, but rapidly grow to political significance by bringing many people on-board through populist initiatives. Many corporates also go through exponential phases of growth either by takeover or venture captial bootstrapping. A generative democracy is an entity which is conceived to itself go through a transformation as it interacts with society. This may mean that it starts out with a drive for funding and supporters with a short clear agenda and then expands into a full political movement with an economic policy and a committee of experts and research and media sectors as it matures. Later it may form a political party or become a political force as organizations like NOW are. Generative democracies can get around the problems which come from obstruction to change that we have noted with Greenpeace and Amnesty. When they meet obstruction, they can take on a new research and policy direction (e.g. proactive genetic ethics) and they can upsize and expand the political controversy into a watershed wich may 'surround' the previous opposition. This can only happen if the purpose of the democracy is broad and 'archetypal' enough not to typecast it - Greenpeace is for example strongly typecast. To be sussessfully generative, a democracy needs to have a visionary idea of how it may evolve in future and take this into account in its development dynamic.

I have developed an interesting model for fractal conferencing which works with very large numbers of people and yet can work by consensus. It could provide an interesting model for the Dead Sea conference. It is your neural net in action!


Fractal Ecosystemic Democraices both permit regional diversity in the branches, consensus decision-making without a division and have far fewer layers of hierarchy than traditional systems of electoral democracy (right) in which a diffuse electorate (gree) elects a party into power (blue) which runs a bureaucracy (red) which governs a population.

Fractal Ecosystemic Democracies

The idea is to form a fractal. say on powers of twelve (apostles, tribes, jury).

Each group decides by consensus and passes its decisions up a level through their chosen spokesperson. Any 'amendments' agreed on one level go up one level and spread down to all the contributory tips of the tree below, to eventually gain consensus one level higher and so on fractally upwards. Ideas can pass down to all 'tips' of the tree, or up in fractal stages. All processes can be accessed by anyone from the grass roots through a 'net search' as they are tabled in real time by each fractal 'committee'.

This is ecosystemic - it means that regional decisions remain autonomous and diverse, while major global issues gradually gather a rolling consensus and modification process as they rise to the top, making them very robust and well-conceived by the time they come to 'cabinet'. No one needs to call a divisive vote because consensus works well in small enough groups.

This could provide an interesting model for a world ecosystemic democracy which is very short in hierarchy - it takes only nine powers of twelve to equal the whole world population. Far fewer than in modern governmental bureaucratic hierarchies.

A variety of means could be used to generate the fractal tree dynamically or stochastically. Individual groups could form and link into regionally-appropriate nodes by agreement. This would require variable groups size with a division process if a group outsizes itself. Alternatively the entire tree could be generated stochastically, effectively bringing random participants into the groups forming the tips of the tree.

Taking the dynamical model a little further we have the following process which ensures that the tree is dynamically free and egalitarian in branch length:

  1. Anyone forming a group of 7 or more is entitled to contribute a spokesperson one level up.
  2. Groups on any level with 7 to 9 members must accept new members at that level.
  3. Groups of the smallest size on any level must accept new members at that level.
  4. Groups from 10 to 13 have discretion, unless they are of the smallest size.
  5. Groups of 14 must split into two groups of 7 by agreement. These then send two spokespeople to the next level up. If this causes a further split, this proceeds fractally upwards. This process ensures the hierarchy only increses in depth once all available places are filled and the process rises to the top level and splits it. All other fractal splittings leave the number of hierarchies unchanged.
  6. A group or individual can renegotiate their position at any time if a new position becomes available, or a split occurs leaving smaller groups available.

Fractal decision-making has the following advantageous features:

  1. Proposals become better researched and more representative as they proceed up hierarchies becuase they have repeated review and receive better researched support.
  2. Meetings on any level are personal, so issues have to be discussed in personal terms which avoids impersoanl alientated decision-making. Such personal meetings provide a good forum for elaborating the good features in understanding and exposing the hubris of protagonists positions, facilitating the decisions of the mediating parties to become a function of the wisdom of the points of view rather than simple jingoistic power politics.
  3. The consensus process favours accomodation to the values of the diverse participants and workable solutions that allow for a maximum degree of autonomy to live and let live in the manner each of the members feel comfortable with. It avoids tyranny of the majority, but requires discretion, creative adaptability and sensistivity on the part of members.
  4. This allows regional diversity to flourish. Regional issues can be autonomously decided at a peripheral level without requiring 'federal' legislation of any sort. In the event agreement cannot be reached about a major issues, it may be possible to subdivide the problem into regional solutions, particularly if the sub-nodes are capable of exercising autonomy over their own lives and laws. This is aided by the branches being regionally-based in physical terms.
  5. Good office. A member of the top level committee would have to have the continuing personal confidence of all the levels of the tree down to the grass roots of which they are a chain spokes-person and the support of the other members on each level as well to continue. This acts to make the highest level spokespeople very responsive and accountable to the the democracy as a whole.

Metamorphic Generative Democracy - WED as an example concept

Wisdom Earth Democracy is conceived as a 'metamorphic generative democracy' - a generative democracy which is designed to bootstrap into a watershed by having visionary principles and a phased growth concept which will give it strongly evolving characteristics in an embrogenic developmental sense. The first thing about WED is that it embraces healing the world order on all fronts - nuclear disarmament through biodiversity - feminine liberation and gender reconciliation - social justice and world ecosystemic democracy. This may at first seem insurmountably complex and repeating the agendas of everyone from Greenpeace to NOW but this is to give it a completely powerful transformative agenda to address bio-apocalypse and the millennial social coming of age. It is not 'repeating' any of these because it is the platform of world liberation in generative form - the 'seed of Renewal'. It has the critical advantage that it is embracing the archetypal in world transformation. This enables it to be fully generative.

The aim here is also to unify spirituality and political action through gender reconciliation. This is a major shift because it is also a shift between 'mind spirit' and 'Gaia body' - that is it is practical ecosystemic spirituality at the biological level. It taps the immense force of desire of all people to live in a world where they can feel the future will be okay instead of a huge nuclear, biodiversity poverty question mark hanging over the future of life. Now the idea is to conceive an embrogenesis pathway for WED which will enable the 'egg' to become a 'catterpillar' and then a pupa and 'butterfly' and really take off. To put it simply here is a set of possible stages.

1. Seed stage: Our own tiny group forms a seed core of trust. This requires us to sort out our gender problems. The idea here is for the 'messiah' to be a Gaea-'helper'. A catalyst for your empowerment, particularly the 'Magdalens' of the Gaea-Messiah complex. We need to agree that we are performing apocalypsia - that is cultural 'unveiling' using social transformation constructively to catalyse a new feminine ecosystemic world order. This is a precipitous short-term transformative movement for the benefit of the long-term welfare of all - especially the genetic heritage. If we can agree on this then we are already a long way. It is not the apocalypse of the messiah but apocalypsia of the feminine as 'ecosystemic sustainability'. It nevertheless involves a passon-dramatic performance to culminate the old order in as stunning a way as possible. The Genesis is a seed research resource to perform this transformation. It has everything from female circumcision to quantum consciousness for this reason. This will all be very useful later.

2. Head hunting: The next stage is pivotal to the feminization of the apocalypsia. A head hunt for the best feminine minds (women and men) to bring into the group to form the 'conceiving uterus' - i.e. research think-tank. Its aim is to work through exactly how we want to perform the feminine greening apocalypsia, and what relation it has to Jerusalem and the patriarchs. This group can be dynamic and evolving in membership.

3. Political inflation: Once the group now has its 'embodiment of wisdom' we can then act politically in a constructively influential way. We can call press conferences, conceive transforamtive events of healing and raise energy for the apocalypsia as a world celebration with the support of a much wider feminine energy base. This needs to be in place by mid-1999 in some shape of form.

4. Apocalypsia: We want to use the millennial transition to mount an initiative for world gender reunion, the restoration of nature and the healing of the genetic and cultural heritage. I see what we are doing as of profoundly more importance than many of the other inititives in the millennium for two reasons. Firstly it is both addressing the root traditions in the Fall which led to our cultural millennium and the natural inequities which lead to bioapocalypse. It is thus both a full spiritual and biological coming of age - cosmological in essence. Secondly it is a transformation to long-term future goodness. That is even the apocalypsia is just a seed for the future sustainable paradise Earth can and shall become. This needs to be a wisdom conference, feminine empowerment and reckoning of the peoch - it is passion drama in its full cultural sense - wind change - season change - the changing of the gurad - the Renewal of the epoch.

5. World political and cultural transformation: Following on from the catharsis are all the realities which are to be achieved. The end of stoning, circumcision etc. The freeing of women from all bondage, especially the bondage inhibiting reproductive choice. The restoration of world ecosystems and biodiversity. Consolidating the ethics for the genetic age. Liberation from poverty and ill-health and political bondage. These come through politcal change and require careful application of transformative democracies to change forever the short-term winner-take-all strategy of transnationals to resotre democracy to the world polulation. To provide regional diversity and genuine cooperative ecosystemic democracy with minimum coercive legislation. A model for this might be fractal consensus democracy. If the whole world met personally in fractal consensus of apostle size ~ 12 or 13 members, there would only be 9 levels of hierarchy from top to bottom. This is far less than in current political democracies.