World’s political leaders are in a conceptual vacuum after the failure of the climate conference in Copenhagen. How should we proceed? Many glances at the internet – as made for changing the world fundamentally through better decision-making processes than the traditional hierarchical systems offer.
Policymakers in hierarchical organizations are usually a small group, limited by the number of people that can sit around a table. Internet knows no such limitations. Hierarchical organizations are based on the idea “You know the best, you are the Boss.” But what is meant by that? A leader is supposed to be an expert in decision-making because he/she has both relevant information and good judgment.
Relevant information comes from persons who know about the actual situation, usually far down in the hierarchy. The problem is that these people are biased and avoid providing information that disadvantages them. Anyone who wants to make his career in a hierarchical organization knows that it is good to say what the leaders wish to hear, which is not always the truth. Thus hierarchies disturb the free flow of information.
Most people think they have a good judgment. Who claims to be a worse judge than the average? Yet, the fact is that each one of us has less discretion than the average in the long run. In fact, the average verdict in a sufficiently large group of independent individuals is surprisingly good. The Gaussian Bell curve illustrates the principle that has made democracy a global success – if people make slightly different estimations, the average estimation is the most rational for the group.
A group of independent and engaged decision-makers with access to relevant information makes better decisions the more people are involved. Good Night Gentleman’s Club and the closed Meeting – Good Morning Digital Direct Democracy!
Internet’s non-hierarchical communication creates an openness that is going to reform decision-making fundamentally. Collecting the relevant information together in written debates with arguments for-and-against, and using internet polls gives the Bell Curve as a democratic result.
The blogpost title alludes to the Belle Epoque, depending on the same factors as we have today – better communication systems and new technology. About 100 years ago our ancestors fought for women’s suffrage. Our new Global Civil Rights Movement is about Digital Direct Democracy. Now we fight for extended universal suffrage – in all issues.
Political corruption and nepotism become almost impossible when people around the world demand that the arguments are clear and concise and published before decisions are taken, and then let the debate be open – as well as the internet voting.
A failure or success? 
Leave a Reply