Pie in the sky ideas:
I propose this as an axiom: If you want to maximize the efficiency of government you must randomize the outcome of decisions enough that leaders cannot be confident that they will not be personally affected by decisions. You have to compel them to care about the good of the population by making sure they share the fate of their population. Authoritarian governments cannot accomplish this. In the past they could somewhat, because the leaders personally went into battles. Only democracies and republics today have anything like a randomized decisions, but even they can become too large.
I recommend that governments begin to include dice rolling in decision making. Using the US Senate as an example lets say the US senate has 20% of senators who do not support a measure. Then if the measure passes anyway there should be a roll with a D20 which will carry a penalty measure preassigned by the largest dissenting group if a 17 or above is rolled and a measure assigned by an even smaller dissenting group if a 20 is rolled. So if the majority passes a measure it still must face the dice. This is only fair, since everybody knows that the ruling parties try hard to fix votes, move voting lines to suit themselves, that with increasing population they have become less responsive to voter concerns and that they have taken advantage of advances in statistics and dynamical systems to predict outcomes thus disadvantaging voters.
I think that dice rolls could have saved the USSR a lot of bad decisions and probably could have kept it solvent. It was too authoritarian, and many decisions did not affect its leadership. They could do anything with no personal risk. No one was ever held accountable for the disappointment which led to its dissolution.
I view USA, Russia, China and the EU as too centralized and non-random and not them alone.
I propose this as an axiom: If you want to maximize the efficiency of government you must randomize the outcome of decisions enough that leaders cannot be confident that they will not be personally affected by decisions. You have to compel them to care about the good of the population by making sure they share the fate of their population. Authoritarian governments cannot accomplish this. In the past they could somewhat, because the leaders personally went into battles. Only democracies and republics today have anything like a randomized decisions, but even they can become too large.
I recommend that governments begin to include dice rolling in decision making. Using the US Senate as an example lets say the US senate has 20% of senators who do not support a measure. Then if the measure passes anyway there should be a roll with a D20 which will carry a penalty measure preassigned by the largest dissenting group if a 17 or above is rolled and a measure assigned by an even smaller dissenting group if a 20 is rolled. So if the majority passes a measure it still must face the dice. This is only fair, since everybody knows that the ruling parties try hard to fix votes, move voting lines to suit themselves, that with increasing population they have become less responsive to voter concerns and that they have taken advantage of advances in statistics and dynamical systems to predict outcomes thus disadvantaging voters.
I think that dice rolls could have saved the USSR a lot of bad decisions and probably could have kept it solvent. It was too authoritarian, and many decisions did not affect its leadership. They could do anything with no personal risk. No one was ever held accountable for the disappointment which led to its dissolution.
I view USA, Russia, China and the EU as too centralized and non-random and not them alone.
