2025-04 The Ecologist 7.3 2025

Good COPs and bad COPs.  For an Asian perspective on decision-making, see the latest in https://theecologist.org/2025/mar/07/voting-consensus 

2025-03 CHINA - the grand tour

My journey starts on 30th Jan from 香格里拉 Shangri-La, visiting villages and talking about their way of life, on my way to Dali, where I meet an ethnic minority, and another village or two.  

Next is a traditional Tibetan wedding in a village in the mountains of Sichuan.  Then it's back to the bicycle, now in Guangdong, where I base my countryside tour on the town of Chunwan, from where I go to some of the villages nearby, one of which is celebrating a granny's 70th birthday!  (Great logistics; I leave all my luggage in the hotel, and cycle off for the day, out tio the sticks.)

While here, I spend a few days in Hong Kong to renew my visa, and then I'm off to Hunan. 

Later on, I hope to go Nánkāi University in Tianjin, before then heading to Beijing for the Fourth 'International Forum on Democracy,' run by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences 中国社会科学院 (tbc).

2025-02 India

The Pahlé India Foundation hosted a demonstration of decision-making, with all present using the de Borda software: www.debordavote.com Here's the report: PAHLÉ INDIA FOUNDATION: A PREFERENTIAL VOTE ROLE-PLAY ON REFORMING INDIA’S PARLIAMENTARY ELECTORAL SYSTEM 16th January, Delhi. www.debordavote.com “the nonduality of right and wrong [is] the state of a buddha.” Longchenpa, a Buddhist monk of the Nyingma tradition. BACKGROUND It seems the human being is naturally binary, with two eyes,

Click to read more ...

2025-01 World Citizens' Assembly

The Ecologist has just published:

https://theecologist.org/2025/jan/16/how-get-consensus-cop30

To beat the COPs' undemocratic oil lobby, let's be more democratic!

2024-30 Christmas

"Love one another," we are told from the pulpit.  "Vote ('for' or) 'against' each other, they say at the hustings.  But nothing in politics is binary, not if the question is asked properly: 'hanging, yes-or-no?' is best replaced by 'how best does society deal with the convicted murderer?'  

Would life be better if everyone were to vote 'with' each other: on a ballot of say 5 options, (as befits a 5-party parliament), stating in oder of preference what they admire/like/tolerate, so to identify, at best, the option with the highest average preference.  And an average involves everyone, of course: the methodology is inclusive, literally.

Politics is the art of compromise.  Preferential voting is its science.  And democracy should be for everyone, not just a faction.  It should be win-win: a few might win everything, many will win much, most wii get something... and preferential decision-making could spell the end of majority rule.

* * * * *

Maybe the ancient Greeks got it wrong.  Maybe "the non-duality of right and wrong... is the state of a Buddha."  (Longchenpa.)

2024-29 The Irish News, 6th Dec

. " POINTS SYSTEM IS PERFECT BASIS FOR ALL-PARTY COALITION " . . So now what happens? Is Friday's open and transparent election to be followed, yet again, by closed and opaque discussions, as the TDs...

Click to read more ...

2024-28 An Honorary Doctorate

Dr. Alexander Rusetsky of Tbilisi's International Peace University at the 3rd Dec. presentation.

2024-27 COP29 - the COP in Baku

It failed, in large part because the UN still doesn't know how best a diverse group of participants can come to a collective consensus.  Obvioulsy, it cannot be done by majority vote.  So they throw the baby out with the bathwater, and don't use voting at all!  Instead, at Saudi Arabia's suggestion, they use what they call consensus  -  protracted discussions, countless coffees, and often the most bizarre use of the chairperson's gavel  -  with every country having a veto.  The very opposite of consensus.  So, needless to say, someone in Baku was bound to apply the veto - and it was... Saudi Arabia.  

But why does no one even try preferential voting?  Why do so many politicians want, either (a) to win, or (b) not to lose, i.e., to veto; either (a) win everything, or (b) lose nothing.  Are politicians within countries, and countries in the UN, unable to accept a methodology, the use of which would mean that the outcome was (almost) bound to be a compromise?

2024-26 A world citizens' assembly?

The Ecologist has just published a review on Citizens' Assemblies  -   https://theecologist.org/2024/nov/22/citizens-assemblies-and-climate-crisis  -  and maybe, in the wake of COP29, we need a 'World Citizens' Assembly' to guide next year's COP in Brazil.

2024-25 COP29, George Monbiot, MBC

When talking on RTÉ on 12th Nov of the need for wise decision-making in COP gatherings, George Monbiot sings the praises of the MBC.  https://www.rte.ie/radio/radio1/clips/22459433/

"So what we need is... a voting process  -  and there are some very clever voting models, for instance, there is one promoted by the de Borda Institute [the Modified Borda Count MBC]  -  looking at how you can have a voting system which, instead of coming down to these 'yes-or-no' binaries, actually develops far more intelligent and nuanced responses than crude voting can..."  George Monbiot, 12.11.24, on RTÉ.