The consequences of bringing about the outlined system would be so far reaching that it is difficult to grasp them all at once, simply because, like layers in an onion, one thing would be overlaid, and dependant, on another. However, let us review some of the more obvious consequences.
There would be complete transparency of national finances. The Treasury and the Inland Revenue, or what ever was decided should replace them, would, of necessity be obliged to be accountable to the people, and would have to make available for scrutiny, by any member of the public, details of for what, where, and when every last penny was spent. No longer would the group of politicians in power be able to hide huge sums of the public’s money and use it just prior to the next election to “bribe” the electorate, as is openly done now (despite assurances that “that is not really what we are doing”), because there would be no politicians and no political parties.
There would be no possibility of “our leaders” giving away more of our sovereignty, say to Europe or U.S.A. in return for their own self aggrandisement and glory, because there would be no “our leaders”. Decisions on all things would be by national ballot/referenda/etc. and thus a true consensus would prevail.
Nor could politicians ‘sell off the family jewels’ as both main parties have done with all the public utilities over the last few years, for corporate, and personal financial gain and party advantage. Granted there are now few left apart from MOD assets and civic buildings, but they are not safe. Look how we are now reliant on foreign owned companies and other countries for defence armaments. ( It is strange how wars start when only “defence armaments” are manufactured and sold !!!)
With respect to the topic of war, we would find that as our own conditions improved immeasurably other nations would rise up and throw off their particular form of misrule and follow our system. This would then totally eliminate wars of any sort. There has never ever been a war started by people against people. It has always been the leaders, the power seekers, both religious and secular, who have started wars. Were it not for those wars, and their cruelties, etched into the collective national memories, all the peoples of the earth would still be at peace with one another, living in harmony, and without the need for armaments. Indeed, this would eventually come about.
The criminal element in society would, unfortunately, not be removed totally, although, with the absence of power seeking misfits, ne’er do wells and confidence tricksters at the helm, role models would be very much thinner on the ground. This would naturally lead to a reduction in those seeking to play “follow-my-leader”, and more sensible laws, based not on what was in the best interests of the leaders and the establishment, but what was in the best interests of the people, would free up more time for the police force to pursue real wrong doers properly instead of chasing their own tails. What is more the police would be answerable to “the people” instead of to warped political masters. Additionally the move to ‘responsibility to the people’ instead of ‘responsibility to political masters’ would ensure that the power of the Association of Chief Constables was removed and replaced by the will of the people, and would go a long way to ensuring honest policing did not have to take second place to “hidden agendas”.
It is worth just thinking about the time spent by our police forces chasing “criminals” who have committed the crime of falling foul of legislation introduced to raise money for the exchequer. Money required to be frittered away by politicians on self aggrandisement, “bribing” the voters, maintaining themselves in a style to which they have never been accustomed, and generally living like kings. (Formerly the exchequer raised the money for the kings requirements and pleasures, but in those days there was only one king, not over six hundred of them, all clamouring for more.) What is more, in those days the king did not have to extort astronomically large sums of money with which to bribe his subjects to keep him in power, God kept him in power. A recent comment on the Blair government, by the veteran left winger Tony Benn, likening it to a “medieval monarchy” “supported by the rich and powerful for the purpose of obtaining favours for themselves”, seems not to be inappropriate! His comment, however, applies to all world governments.
Since its inception over fifty years ago the National Health Services main purpose has been as a political entity. It was first conceived as a way of tying the people to a socialist state. Its title “The National Health Service” obviously gives the game away. It is, in fact, a national illness service, no one who is in good health needs it. However calling it the national illness service would have given a rather negative message and would not have said what the politicians of the time wanted it to say. Which was “Socialism is so good that it even ensures you have good health”. Subsequent governments have not dared dismantle it for fear of being ousted, but have been more than reluctant to ensure that it was adequately financed. The end result is what we see today, a political football kicked across “the floor of the house” at each and every opportunity in order to score political points. Each successive government has promised that the National Health Service would be improved and each successive government has not done so. Each successive government has taken more and more money from the population on the pretext that improvement to the National Health service necessitated this. There now exists a large number of people who have, all their working lives, paid ( well more correctly had extracted from them) vast sums of money to keep the NHS afloat, and who now, when age has ensured that they need the care and attention to which they are entitled and for which they have already paid, are treated as worthless second class citizens. This appalling and inexcusable state of affairs would cease with Real Democracy, and a new enlightened approach would ensure that what finance was needed would be provided, because the vast amounts spent on vainglorious and narcissistic follies such as the Millennium Dome, the “renovation” of Ministerial residences and “playing at being a world-class state” would disappear overnight.
We currently have the horrendous sight of politicians of all parties playing games with the future of this country in respect of our “full” entry into the United States of Europe. One gaggle pontificate and tell us why there is no future for us outside Europe, and then another rag tag bunch tells us that there is no future for us inside Europe. It is perfectly obvious that they do not know. No one knows, and can not know, and yet each group is quite prepared to commit us all to who-knows-what, simply because they can see benefit in it for themselves, and in any case they will be shielded from what ever happens, and if there are any hardships and discomfort it will not be they who have to bear them. It is very closely akin to suicide by proxy. Under Real Democracy all these types of “decisions based on ignorance” would vanish. The decisions would be made by the people affected. At worst the decisions would be no worse than those made by our present “pseudo democratically elected leaders”, however, with the views of the whole country taken into account, the decisions would be far more intelligently thought out and the end results, whatever they were, would be acceptable to the people, because the decisions were taken democratically.
Over the years political parties have vied with each other in claiming they were “getting tough with crime”, or some other similar high principled sounding phrase. They then do a little bit of something, such as commissioning an investigation (always a very cheap option and a way of avoiding actually doing something constructive), and then hope the people will forget their promises or the problem will go away. In actual fact their fine sounding words are totally at variance with their own actions. The old saying “actions speak louder than words” is indeed very true. One has only to look at the list of Members of Parliament and the Lords who have been involved in scandals such as sexual offences and perversion, drugs offences, financials misdemeanours, lying, cheating and perjury to realise that they practice not what they preach. “Leading by example” was always held to be the most effective way of leadership, and, without a doubt, when we look around at the increase in the level of criminal activity, it is quite apparent that as “our leaders” crimes are revealed to all, so the level of criminal activity in those being led is rising at a similar rate. In addition, as the seriousness of “our leaders” crimes rises so does the seriousness of those being led. In fact matters have become so debased that the most serious crime, for both sets of criminals, appears to be getting caught. Many years ago no one would have considered trying to claim benefits to which they were not entitled, but today there are millions of pounds disappearing into pockets that have no honest claim at all. This is not really surprising when one looks at the indifferent way that the public is viewed by the politician when this money is being wrung out of an over taxed and already impoverished people, and the way in which “our leaders “ appropriate this money for their own purposes. With Real Democracy the people would get tough with crime in a proper way and would not be open to “lobbying” by all self interest groups in the passing of criminal legislation.
Every so often when they think they have gone too far “our leaders” try pushing “old fashioned family values”. They conveniently ignore the fact that they have legalised and promoted homosexuality, condoned and assisted sex changes, allowed surrogate parenthood to practicing homosexuals and presided over an economy which has ensured that in order to have a standard of living just above the poverty line it is now necessary for both parents to work ( if they can find work). They have meddled with education so that even children as young as six or seven are sexually aware and experimenting, and we find mothers as young as twelve. For over half a century successive governments have usurped more and more parental responsibilities in the name of the Welfare State, aided by interfering OBE seeking do-gooders. Parents can no longer discipline their children as they see fit without ending up in court. Local Authorities are empowered to remove children from their parents if they wish. What a child is taught at school is controlled not by the parents but by the government, and a parent may not keep the child away from this dissemination of knowledge and political correctness, even though 50% of it is of little or no value. All these, and more, have ensured that “old fashioned family values” will never ever return until the people of this country can return to a sane form of life and that can only stem from a sane form of Real Democracy. When this goal is realised Real education for life can begin, and parents can assume their true position in that process.
