How money undermines democratic systems

Unaccountable representation

Representative government was originally designed for small, rural communities, where those sent to Congress were truly accountable and known, not by their words only but by their deeds at home. Today a single representative represents sometimes millions, and those millions have no real knowledge of the person they're sending on their behalf.

This lack of accountability leaves the perfect gap for motivated groups to groom candidates who are influenced to fulfill a preset agenda rather than the people's agenda. They influence these candidates via huge spending on political campaigns and the promise of lucrative positions in private institutions after their terms are finished.

Money in politics

However, the truth is that powerful entities spend billions of dollars to influence government even before anyone gets elected. In the United States, for example, the U.S. Constitution's framers intended for the branches of government to check one another through their competing ambitions for power, creating real checks and balances.

Princeton researchers Gilens and Page concluded that, once elite and business influence is accounted for, ordinary citizens have “little or no independent influence on policy at all.” In the same model, average-citizen preferences show a “zero estimated impact upon policy change.”

“The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy” Princeton researchers Gilens and Page [1].

That reality was undermined by the concept of the political party, instead of branches of government fighting each other for power, a unified party becomes a single, corruptible target. 

"There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader..."

- John Adams 

This vulnerability is where money hijacks the system. In return for billions in funding, powerful entities don't just get a seat at the table, they get to write the menu. The party's agenda becomes tied not to the will of the people, but to the priorities of those who bankroll their power, turning elected officials into service providers for their largest funders. 

Lobbyists

How it works is that representatives are given as little as a few hours to vote on bills that are hundreds of pages long with massive implications. The only help they have is, often, young staffers who are typically fresh out of college. These staffers are generally not experts and are poorly paid due to budget constraints. They are under enormous pressure to analyze the bill and report to the representative in hours.

This is where the lobbyists come in, they interject themselves in the process by influencing these young staff with free advice that comes backed up by hundreds of pages of data, reports, and a detailed analysis on these complicated subjects. Under enormous pressure, these staff then report the lobbyist findings to the representative, who are habitually threatened that if they don't vote according to party lines, they'll be challenged "primaried" by their own party in the next election.

"we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it..." - US politician

This is a fictitious example to clarify how this works.

A 23-year-old aide, facing a dense banking deregulation bill, is lost in jargon about "capital reserve requirements." He has three hours to write a summary. A lobbyist for a major bank, aware of the deadline, emails a pre-packaged brief arguing the change "unlocks capital for small business loans." With no time for independent research, the aide adopts this analysis for his memo. His boss, the representative, is then briefed that the provision helps small businesses and votes in favor, unknowingly weakening rules designed to prevent a financial crisis.

Inequality

Although the systems of manipulation are different in different countries, many of the systems we rely on are fundamentally flawed, in often shamefully public and widely understood ways. The constant erosion of people's relative income, power and rights is a constant reminder of this reality. 

The results

In the US, 80% of Americans disapprove of how Congress operates. In Europe, trust in political parties and politicians has been consistently low for two decades.

People don't feel represented by their representatives, but lack sufficient control to stand for their rights.

The reality

Unfortunately, changing a few key figureheads via election does not change government. Even if people found someone uninfluenceable to elect, without meaningful control over the process or agenda being legislated on, people have little meaningful control over their government. 

• But what if there was a better way?

• A way in which people could select from working systems rather than empty promises?

• A way in which people can create the legislative agenda and have true control without the excesses that would create?

• What if the solution was to create an open source form of government in which fully functional systems competed with each other for citizens? 

Cyber Sovereignty as the alternative

Cyber Sovereignty pits working versions of government, as digital societies, into a competitive system in which people choose the digital society that is solving their problems.

People “vote with their feet” and join the system of government doing the best possible job on behalf of their citizens.

Comparison

As more and more people join digital societies, national governments become limited to purely matters that require national or sub-national organization. 

Without Cyber Sovereignty	With Cyber Sovereignty
Monolithic - One system of values and ideas is imposed on everyone by force creating resentment.	Diverse - Everyone joins the system that they agree with securing freedom.
Representative - People vote for others who they hope will implement their ideas. Representatives are easily manipulated.	Open source - Everyone contributes to the ideas of government and the best ideas win citizens.
Static - Suffers from the inability to change systems, even when proven corrupt.	Competitive - Population sizes grow and shrink depending on the quality of leadership.
Consolidated - A lack of true independence means systems are manipulated to minimize people's rights.	Adversarial - Two independent forms of government hold each other in check to ensure rights are protected.
Debt-laden - A lack of accountability for spending habits means debts almost always grow.	Protected - If debts grow too much, people leave the society.

To be clear, Cyber Sovereignty leaves national governments in place. It creates a new realm of government in which the more intimate/personal forms of government are expressed.