Well, you did say that all my questions had been thought out and solved. Can't you post that part?

It is not a finished document, but if you wish to read go ahead:

The Wires Behind the System

The whole purpose of Druvianism is to create a government in which the people are able to successfully run their government corrupt-free. The most widely accepted solution of how to do this, is the use of a very complex technological system to aide us.

The best way to understand such a complex system is to understand what it would be doing. "The Bureaucracy is growing to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy". Throughout history, Bureaucracies have been created to help the government in its management needs. However because of the way humanity is, they have often become corrupt and inefficient thus ending up being counter-productive. However, a Bureaucracy that was mostly technological in form, would in theory be much more efficient and require less human involvement. The Druvian system is such a massive and complex system that it would require billions of calculations a day. Such a system could just not be possible without the aide of computers.

The calculations would be made from a series of networked supercomputers. One hundred supercomputers would be in charge of strictly making calculations. All one hundred would be making the same exact calculation at the same time, they would then automatically check the other supercomputers to see how the other calculations went. Suppose one has a wrong calculation, it will be overridden automatically by the other ninety-nine. One wrong supercomputer is no case for alarm, however if ten start making wrong calculations it would then set off an alarm in which human technical support is in order.

In the case of a scheduled maintenance, the Senate would approve and a team of randomly selected engineers would be assembled. The entire maintenance session is televised, to ensure nothing is done to the most important system in the nation. As well as that, the Civil Protection Force (CPF) would be there to ensure they are not attacked.

So one hundred computers all performing millions of calculations in just a few minutes. They then send the information off to the National Database Center. This is located in the National Library, the very center of it. It is surrounded by walls and walls of thick steel and is a room filled with air cooling units. Here all of the information is stored here about every person in the nation. It is as well extremely well guarded.

Druvianism has a federal system of four levels - National, Territorial, Municipal (Cities), and Local (Neighborhods). All of these governments operate in the same format and would as well use the same computers and databases.

There are several ways of identifying yourself in this system. Your fingerprint would be kept in database, as well as retinal information and possibly even your DNA. At first identification cards would be used, but as time goes on we would improve the system. Whenever the system identifies you - for getting on a bus, buying a luxury, etc - it goes into your profile. Your profile is available for you to access at anytime from your computer. However it is also available for others to view information. Certain things you can choose to hide from public view, but some things are required for viewing like your name for example.

Obviously hacking and identity theft is one of the worst crimes that would be committed and perhaps - with the exception of obvious physical crimes like murder and rape - would be the only possible ones. Identity theft could be pretty simple to fix. The system needs retinal ID and finger print ID, so the thief would have to recreate both without taking it from the actual person (I think somebody would know if they have been robbed if they are missing an eye and a finger) but even if they are able to do such a thing, there is no physical currency so they would have to go on a shopping spree - the CPF (Civil Protection Force) would then be notified of an alert and could take security images of the person purchasing things and see that it indeed does not match with the one in the database.

A greater threat would be the threat of an attack on the actual system. To prevent this a large series of database security measures would be taken. Like the supercomputers, there are a series of checks that go on for the databases. There are one hundred databases to match the information coming from the supercomputers. Suppose one of the account's information was changed, it would not take into affect until fifty-one of the databases were changed as it requires the majority to use for the ‘real‘ one. The hacker would need to be able to successful change the information on fifty-one of the most secure databases in the entire world and would need to do it simultaneously.

Basically this would be the greatest task of the entire information age. A true wonder of the world, however with enough of the right thinking and ambition it can be done.

I'll say, I mean, with all these nuclear issues, wars, and such, nothing could be better!

How so? If there are not two major sides on the political spectrum, then how were they created?

And, yes, you give me any instance, and there will be 2 views or sides to it.

Someones already made that. It's called a democracy.

Didn't you just say it was run by the people?

How so?

That is not thought out. Take away currency, and everyone gets an equal share, no matter how hard they had to work in life to get it.

It's "lose". Please refer to The12thman's signature.
You mean something like this:

? Is THAT a political tool you used?

Political tool?



Your 'government' might need a reform.

US would be fine if we just first dealt with our inside problems. And its neither a democracy nor communistic.

__________________

How is communism not run by the people, lets not mix up communism and stalinism.

Did you read through the new economic system? It is not equal share, it is quite different than what you think.

If you are going from point a to point c, and you have to pay at point b, would not it be more efficient to go from point a to c without going through point b? Bureaucracies need to have the human influence out of it, the point of bureaucracies is to ensure the stability of the government and cary out the logistical aspects of it. However if you use a technological bureaucracy, then it is free from corruption, i.e. computers don't have emotions.

I dont see what that has to do with this topic, just you using the worst method of debate.

All governments need reform, governments should be flexible and able to constantly change itself with the changing populace. However I think you should spend more time learning about this government instead of discarding it as 'need for reform'. You have taken one step in the lake and claimed the whole lake is 1 feet deep.

Anything can be turned into a political tool, political tools are only wrong when used for personal gain. I am not gaining anything by you having an open mind, however you are gaining immensely by having an open mind.

Actually you can take any issue and come up with way more than two if you take it beyond "yes" and "no" and look at reasons and methods. I have a hard time envisioning a computer system that can successfully make such distinctions.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

Good to see you arnt afraid to celebrate the rights of oppressive dictators, heh heh

If it comes to a choice between them or the dictators, which do you think most people will pick?

No he wasnt...he used violence and coersion to manipulate the system. That is not democracy, sorry.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

I see what you're getting at in the first part. Some radicals and dictators due indeed come to power over the popular dislike for globalization. In Hitler's case it was more a mix of paranoid propaganda, coercion, and lack of competition. It is a different world now than then. And it's multinationals that are feared more now, not the silly Jewish banker-Communist conspiracy theory Hitler capitalized on.
But yes, multinationals hate populists and much prefer right-wing military dictators. That's a problem, since most of us, I assume, would rather see elected socialists than coup-induced capitalists. One of the chief problems with populist leaders in the third world is that they often invite military coup that tosses them out and destroys democracy- usually for privilage of the elites the populists proposed to defeat (though in practice don't).
But it is not a good idea to view Hitler through the same lens as Chavez (cantrary to what DuH might think) and in theory, I think that multinationals are less horrible than dictators- provided they never gain the support of the military.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

Tell me how it works then. I will find a fault in anything you say.


That's smart thinking. Except it wasn't debate. I was simply correcting him on his spelling. In fact, I am not debating him at all. I am trying to find out how he is trying to make this work.

For what he has said so far, yes, it looks like it needs a few changes. As for your analogy, untrue and completely irrelevant. If you're going to try to insult me, do it somewhere else. Once again, I am trying to learn about it, that is why I posted.

He just said do away with political tools. Yet he is using them. Tell me why.

__________________

Please ignore the tardiness in this response.

That is a very close minded approach now isn't it.

You misunderstood, political tools are not wrong, only if used for personal gain. Re-read.

On a different note, has anyone seen V for Vendetta. Would you think that V would support Druvianism?

A fantasy supporting a whimsy?

now that would be stretching the credulous credulity of what most people would consider the extreme stretch of 'stretching-it' a stretch too far...

__________________
"A man's work is nothing but this slow trek to rediscover, through the detours of art, those two or three great and simple images in whose presence his heart first opened."