Bryden Allen's Website

A Safe Village Governmental Element

-  Should Disaster Strike


The last 60 years have been very good for us in the western world. So we all have enjoyed increasing economic growth and wealth. However this good situation may not last much longer. In this webpage then I first outline the possible disasters we could have to face quite soon. Then I outline the accepted nature of life during an emergency period after such a disaster. And also how the various levels of government will deal with the usual problems during this time.
            Then in the following four sections I introduce some new ideas. I show how the municipal areas can be divided into small village-sized units and how these village units will easily be able to deal with the causes of almost all possible disasters. And furthermore I can show how all people can then check that all the supervising people are acting in an honest and just manner to all people. So it will be an extremely fair system.
            Of course an emergency period cannot last too long. So finally I must show how a nation can then return back to normal life. But I hope, when you have read this whole tract, you might realise that a possible disaster could be a blessing in disguise - and afterwards we could return to normal life in a healthier and saner frame of mind. For example people might no longer believe that economic growth and globalism is the wonder it is all cracked up to be.


1.         Possible Disasters


            Over the last 60 years there have been no world disasters. But just previous to this we had - World War I, the Great Depression and then World War II, all in fairly quick succession. And these events were very significant world disasters. If you look back over history, you will find most nations suffer a couple of very significant disasters every century – mostly in terms of wars or disease epidemics. There is no reason for us to expect this situation not to continue.
            In terms of the world’s immediate future, the sort of disasters, we can imagine, are the following.
1)         On the international level, world debt has been increasing to dangerous levels. For example, the U.S., in spite of all its natural wealth, is heavily in debt to China. And so far no nation has found a way to reduce this debt. And, if nations start to default on their debts, then this situation could lead to the collapse of world trade. This would be a world disaster because all nations are now so dependent on world trade for their livelihoods.
2)         World recessions can still occur. And, if unemployment levels rise in nations above 20%, then such a situation should best be regarded as a national disaster.
3)         Our world CO2 pollution is causing climate change. If this situation continues, then this circumstance will lead to the world’s worst disaster for many millennia. The trouble is that this whole process is very slow and this means that all people can avoid doing anything about it in the immediate future. Nevertheless this situation will eventually lead to a terrible world disaster.
            I have described these circumstances independently. But very likely these three disasters would be connected. Thus a debt crisis would lead to a collapse of world trade. And this collapse in world trade would lead to high unemployment in many nations. But then the nations might come to their senses and use all these unemployed people to do all the work that is necessary to create non-polluting renewable energy sources (e.g. Wind Farms, and PV and hot-water panels). So the disaster might turn out to be a blessing.
            There are many other types of disaster that could happen – floods, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanoes, epidemics etc. And this work could apply to all of these disasters. But in writing this tract, I am principally thinking about the combined disaster, which I have described above.
            The other feature that we must bear in mind is that our globalist tendencies over the past century have made the world safety situation much worse. Thus our dependence on other countries for our manufacture means that, if international trade should fail, then our world industrial system would collapse. Also, with everyone travelling everywhere, a disease epidemic could spread around the world in days. So our world may not have time to develop suitable resistance measures. This would also cause a world catastrophe.
            I don’t want to be a scaremonger – but we ought to bear these simple facts in mind.



2.         The Nature of Life during an Emergency Period


During a temporary emergency the accepted practice is that:

• All people are treated equally, and
• All resources are used for the common good.

I, and most people, completely support this accepted practice.
            This means that the wealthy people no longer have all the advantages that they normally have. So:

• The wealthy will have to accept the same treatment and facilities as everyone else,
• The assets of the wealthy may be used for the common good. So, some well-off people might have to accept some people, in need, to be billeted with them.

            We all accept that this must happen. But the emergency period should not be extended any longer than is necessary. But this is not always possible. For example, in Britain during World War II the emergency period lasted for about seven years. This situation was unavoidable.
            So during an emergency period, the wealthy will be slightly disadvantaged. But we don’t need to feel too sorry for these wealthy people. They will receive their assets back in full as soon as the emergency period is over. Also the wealthy own our media. So you can be sure the wealthy people’s case would be well aired on the media before the emergency period was called. So an emergency would not have been called unless it was really necessary. Also the wealthy have always been very good at looking after their own particular interests. So I think the wealthy will be able to manage. It might even be a good new experience for them.

            Now let us remind ourselves in general terms what a government has to do during a time of emergency. The four principal activities are:
1)         Make sure that all the essential services continue to run as normal. This includes agriculture, energy, water, communications and medical and educational facilities.
2)         Making sure that all these essential facilities are distributed fairly to all the population. So no one should need to suffer.
3)         If there is an emergency there must be some work to be done to fix the problem. The government must organise what is to be done about the country’s problems.
4)         Probably less then half the population are employed in the essential services of the country. Thus the government must re-employ all these people in a manner that is beneficial to the country as a whole.
            I hope, if you think about these four tasks carefully, you will realise that the emergency government won’t have an easy time. So the purpose of this tract is to demonstrate in a reasonable amount of detail how all this work can be done. Furthermore I hope to show that all this work can be done in a manner that is clearly very fair to all people.



3.         The Functions of the Normal Levels of Government


Our country is normally run by

• Our national government,
• Our state governments and
• Our municipal governments.

            Naturally I want, as much as is possible, for these governments to remain to be in charge of what they have normally been responsible for. So clearly our national government will continue to be in charge of defence and our state governments will continue to be in charge of their medical and educational facilities.
            But, of course, most activities are not directly run by government but by private enterprise. And certainly, during an emergency, we all would like the same people to continue to run the same essential services. But, during an emergency period, these individual people in charge must take direct orders from the appropriate levels of government to make sure that their activities are now strictly directed towards the common good of the country. But, fortunately, we do know that this is possible because it has all been successfully done in our previous world wars. So we do know what to do. During these wars the appropriate levels of government did take charge of what they ought to be in charge of. So I won’t try to go into details on this matter.
            But less than half of our country’s population is engaged in essential services. If we go on our war-time experience then the activities, which are regarded to be non-essential, are the following:
1)         New construction – thus we certainly don’t want any more luxury large new homes.
2)         Manufacture of luxury and non-essential items.
3)         Insurance – because the government will take care of any disasters.
4)         Investment banking – because the government will decide what needs to be invested in the country.
5)         Tertiary education – because, as a temporary measure, it is best if young people learn about their new activities at work.
6)         Advertising – the only people who think that the country needs the advertising industry are the people employed in the industry.
7)         Gambling - and clearly there must also be strong limitations on the usage of alcohol and drugs.
8)         There must be limits on the usage of private cars.
9)         Finally there must be limits on some amusement activities.
            So, if people are temporarily no longer engaged in these activities, probably a little more than half our country’s population will be free to work on the essential problems facing our country. In times of war these people either went to fight the war or helped with the war effort at home. And, as this was a national concern, this was organised by the national government.
            But, in our case, I am assuming we aren’t fighting a war - but rather we will be dealing with our own internal problems. And over the next four sections, I want to put a strong case that this work should be done in local village-like communities. This is because everyone can then clearly see everything that goes on and so everyone can be assured that everything is done in a fair and just manner. But it will take me a few pages to adequately put my case.



4.         The Physical Form of our Suburban Village Communities


Our national government rules over 20 million people; our state governments usually rule over more than a million people; and our municipal governments usually rule over about 40,000 people. These political elements are far too large for most people to be aware of what precisely is going on. So it is very hard to tell how well they are being run.
            The village communities I am proposing will have between 1,000 and 2,000 people. I choose this size because this means our community villages will have about 20 children per year. And this means our villages can run their own small infant schools. I think it is most important that young children can walk to school easily within their own local community.
            These suburban villages will still be a little too large for everyone to know everyone else. But they are sufficiently small for all people to get to know all the important people very well. So everyone can see what is going on and how well everything is working. Most importantly everyone will know who is doing a good job among their various leaders.

            In standard suburbia, a square area about 500 meters wide will contain this number of people. So physically these villages will not be large. There will be between 20 and 30 villages per municipal council.
            The essential item that a village must have is a village centre. Everyone in the village would go to this village centre at least once a day. So the village bus would go from the centre, on a very frequent basis, and then take the village people to the local council municipal amenities (and from here there would be extensive public transport to the major city facilities). The village shop would be located at the centre and people would obtain their daily provisions from this shop. Also all the many officers, which I shall detail in the following section, will have their offices here and the village people would consult them at these offices. The village infant-school should also be close to this centre.
            And, as the village is only 500 m wide, everyone should live less than 300 meters from this centre. So all people should able to walk to this centre in less than 10 minutes.
            Unfortunately, as I am certain you are fully aware, such convenient village centres rarely exist in normal suburbia. But we can simply make the centres by requisitioning some large houses and buildings close to the centre of a village area. And these various buildings can be adjusted to suit our requirements. These adjustments can be done fairly quickly. During an emergency period all people must get used to doing something that is a bit make-shift.
            I know there will be a tendency for the people who run these village centre facilities to claim they need better accommodation. And these people then will want their facilities moved to better accommodation - but which does not lie near the centre. However such people must be ignored. It is far better for everyone to be able to get to these facilities easily - than the people who run the facilities have precisely the accommodation they want.


A normal genuine village should lie in the country and be surrounded by agricultural lands, which its people cultivate. We naturally can’t have this situation in our suburban villages. But we can associate some particular agricultural land with each suburban village. And this situation has some important advantages:
1)         If there are problems about food supply, then each village could partially support its own people with food by using their own labour on their associated land. This is a very healthy thing for city people to do.
2)         The village can cause less pollution by using some of its excreta to fertilise their agricultural land. And then their agricultural land would need less fertiliser from other sources.
3)         But, most important of all, this agricultural land could absorb any of the suburban village’s spare labour. We, in Australia, have been terrible about looking after our land. We spend far too much of our labour on building big houses and driving everywhere in cars. We neglect our land. This emergency period can give us an opportunity to redress this problem. So we can remove some of our CO2 pollution out of the atmosphere by growing trees (and making sure these trees don’t burn down). Similarly we can grow extra vegetation and plough it into the land and improve the quality of the land. This will all help to redress our poor practices over the last few decades.
            Using normal Australian agricultural practices, one person usually needs about one hectare of Australian land to support themselves (provided that the rainfall is more than 600 mm). This means that each village needs a square stretch of agricultural land about 4 km wide (1,600 ha). But unfortunately this land cannot be too close because the whole of Sydney, with a population of 4 million, would need a square stretch of land 200 km wide.
            This amount of land can be found in the land stretching - south to include all the southern-highlands, then west to include Young, Cowra and Orange and then north to include the whole of Hunter valley lands. Each village then could have reasonable agricultural land within 200 km of the suburban village. So this can be done.
            Thus each of these suburban villages can have the option of engaging in as much agricultural activity as its people like to do. The only restriction would be that the village members working there would have to stay for 3 or 4 days to justify their travelling expenses.
            {In NSW there would still be land further away without any suburban village to look after it and improve it. But these more distant regions could be looked after by the various municipal councils. These councils would have to use more distant travel arrangements. So people might need to stay there for a fortnight to justify the longer travelling expenses.}


I think our villages should, as much as possible, be in control of the activities on their own land. There has been a tendency for control of all activities to be moved up to the higher echelons of government. But, if each village has a good well-elected government, then this government should be able to do a better job of running the activities that just concern its own people on their own land (rather than the remote higher echelons of government).
            This situation applies to the roads in the village. Ideally a village area would only contain local roads, which are just used by its local members. And then the village government should control and maintain these local roads. And the speed limit on these local roads would be very low indeed, because vehicles would only be travelling a couple of hundred meters before they moved out onto the major municipal or state roads. And, for these roads, the safety of the local children is then more important than speed. And then ideally each village would have the municipal or state roads on its boundaries where much higher speeds would be allowed.
            But unfortunately sometimes municipal and state roads must often cross our village lands. But, when the village areas are being set up, this situation should be minimized as much as possible.


Ideally also all people should live in suburban villages. And then our municipal areas would be reserved for municipal activities and our state areas would be reserved for state activities. But unfortunately some people do live in what are naturally municipal areas and some people do live in what are naturally state areas (i.e. city centres). Clearly such people would mostly continue to live where they are. But all such people should have a suburban village to which they will be attached. This situation will become extremely important when we have to consider how law and order can be maintained in all our various communities. And, if these people break the community rules, then they may have to move into the proper community area where their activities can be observed more easily (as is described in the following sections).



5.         Village – Activities, Officers and Representatives


This section is basically about how our villages should be governed. But, before doing this, it is best if we are clear in our minds about the work that will need to be carried out in our village areas. So here I first list these principal activities.
1)         The village’s farm-land will need to be managed. The normal farmers will continue to run the land – but sometimes with the help of the city village people. But the village people should tell these farmers what they want them to produce.
2)         The food, which the village needs, will have to be acquired and fairly distributed among the village population. This is best done at a village shop.
3)         The village’s various buildings and roads will need to be maintained.
4)         The village will need to run a frequent bus service from its village centre to the municipal centre, so that its people can use the municipal transport, schools and other commercial facilities outside the village area.
5)         The village will need its own simple medical facilities.
6)         The village will have its own small infants’ school to run.
7)         Currently our large state or national corporations run our essential services in terms of electricity, water, sewerage and communications. But it would be better if some of the maintenance work for the facilities, which lie on the village lands, was actually done by the village people themselves.
8)         Each village will need its own simple post-office and banking system.
9)         Each village should provide and maintain some social and sporting facilities. So a village would need its own café.
            If the purpose of the emergency period is also to deal with climate change, then the village people would also need to be engaged in -
a)         Insulating its various buildings so that these buildings would use less energy when the weather was either too hot or too cold,
b)         Installing hot-water panels on some of their buildings (they would also have to do the associated plumbing work),
c)         Installing PV panels on some of their buildings (and similarly they would have to do the associated electrical work),
d)         Installing continuous electrical meter recorders. When energy supply is partly dependent on weather conditions then it becomes essential that people pay higher or lower energy rates depending on whether the current energy is either in high or low demand.


Besides these practical tasks, there will need to be people in the village who are in charge of:
1)         Organising the employment of all the village people for all these above tasks,
2)         Organising the accommodation for all the people who are in need,
3)         Keeping control of the finances of the community,
4)         Representing the community when necessary i.e. at the municipal council meetings,
5)         Chairing and running village community meetings (i.e. chairperson and secretary).

Fairly clearly most of these activities should have a person in charge - and these people in charge must have had considerable previous experience in their field. I call these people in charge – the “officers”. And clearly the crucial task for the village community is how to choose all these various officers. And the success or failure of each village community will very much depend on how well these various officers are chosen. Beneath these officers there would also normally be supervisors who would direct the work in more detail.
            I will first outline two simplistic ways of doing this operation. And then I will give what I think is probably the best solution. Choosing a community’s leaders always has been, and always will be, a terribly difficult problem.


A)        This first method could be regarded to be the democratic ideal. Here all the village people would gather together once a week and, at these meetings by gradual degrees over many weeks, they would elect all the necessary officers.
            The trouble with this method is that there would be more than a thousand people at these meetings. And, with everyone voting, this number is too unwieldy. And so many people would soon stop coming to this big meeting. Also most voters wouldn’t have studied the relevant details covering the various candidates’ qualifications and experience to vote competently. So the voting process could result in poor officers being chosen.


B)        This second method is more analogous to the way our present governing system runs. Here the community would just gather for one large meeting per year. And, at this big meeting, the people would elect a leader (or a party if they prefer). And this leader, or party, would choose all the officers for the following year.
            Physically this is a more practical method. The weakness of the method is that now all the details, about how and why the various officers were chosen, are usually concealed from the common people. So the common people would cease to know what is going on. The common people would just have to have faith in their new leader – and often that faith could be misplaced. This method tends to elect a leader who is a good public speaker. But this doesn’t mean that the leader will be unbiased in how the various officers are chosen. Normally leaders just tend to choose their mates and supporters for the best and most important offices.


The method then I wish to recommend is really a combination of these two methods. The principle feature of this method is that every person in the village will choose a representative to represent them. And all these representatives will meet at least weekly for the all-important weekly meetings and here the representatives will choose all the various officers.
            If each such representative person represents between 30 and 40 people then there would need to be about 40 representatives per village. And 40 representatives is a sensible number of people to attend all the village weekly meetings.
            The first firm point I will make is that these representatives cannot be amateurs. These positions must be paid full-time jobs. If this is the case, then we can insist that each representative must attend all village meetings (just very occasionally they could nominate a substitute). We can then also expect that each representative will have sufficient time to study the qualifications and experience of all applicants for the various offices. So these representatives should be capable of judging fairly - and so the best applicants should be chosen. And finally how each representative voted can be recorded for every decision. So all the village people can later check which representative voted for which officer. {I would hope in fact that all village people could still attend the weekly meeting in the background. But naturally here these people couldn’t speak or vote - unless requested.} Clearly a representative cannot be an officer because there would be a clash of interest. So a representative must resign before they can stand for the position of an officer themselves. These rules should help eliminate the most common causes of corruption (or collusion) we see in the current world.
            The village people should choose a person to represent them whom they personally know and trust. But of course there must be at least 30 other people who also want to have this representative. So this situation must pose a limitation on people’s choice. Also a person can’t choose a representative who already has 40 people to represent. But this should not be a problem because this representative is bound to know other representatives who feel the same way as they do. So this representative will be able to tell any people without a representative what to do. {Normally a person would first go to the closest representative first – and there should usually be at least one representative in every street.} In general this system still gives people far more choice, as to who shall represent them, than our current political system does.
            A further duty of the various representatives would be to inform the people, whom they represent, what is going on – and to answer any questions they have. But people can’t demand too much time of their representative - otherwise their representative might tell them to go and find a new representative. Over time, I think this total system should mean that most people would be represented by personal friends, whom they really knew and trusted. And this situation would give all the villagers a lot of confidence that the best officers were being chosen.
            Clearly there must be an officer who keeps a file of all the representatives in the village and all the people they represent. I call this officer the membership officer. And this file must be open to everyone in the village to inspect. This would be a very open system.
            If you now look back to all the problems I said were associated with methods A and B, you will find that this method has none of these problems. So this method is fairly sound. The cost of this method is that the community village must support the 40 representatives who do all this officer-selection work. But this is not a high cost – thus these representatives would number less than 5% of the total work-force. I think it is essential that any community spends a sensible amount of time and effort in making sure that its community chooses the best officers.


In the system I have so far outlined, each village community is doing all this officer selection work itself. And this is the best thing to do. But there should be people in the upper echelons of government who should be watching how all these villages are governing themselves.
            I think the higher governments should provide at least one special officer to each village. And this “supernal officer” would be present at all the village meetings. And this officer would speak out, if the officer thought that the villagers were doing something wrong. Also this officer could provide information so that their village could compare themselves with the way other villages are performing. So this supernal officer would also help to make sure that the village was well governed.



6.         Visibility, Recognition and Remuneration


During a war period, all active people normally wear a uniform. And this situation is extremely useful because observers can see - who is involved, what their task is and how important they are. I think this general idea could be beneficially applied to an emergency period as well.
            Now in an emergency period everyone will be involved in this very new situation. And, like war, it will be very useful to know precisely what everyone does. But it would be too expensive to give everyone several sets of uniforms. However we can get the same effect by simply giving everyone a good identification card, which must be worn whenever the person is in a public area. This card should contain the following essential information.
1)         The person’s name,
2)         The person’s address – an important item is also the village name,
3)         The person’s employment details – in particular if they are an officer or a representative,
4)         The person’s qualifications and abilities,
5)         The person’s membership level – I will talk about this topic later.
            Wearing these cards will mean that everyone will know precisely who everyone else is and also their position in the village community. This information will make life much easier. So, for example, when a person goes into the village shop then the shop-keeper will quickly know who the purchaser is. And they will be able to enter their purchases under their correct account immediately.
            People don’t like wearing identification cards because it is not so easy to cheat. But then, during a period of emergency, it becomes very important that people cannot cheat. And cards will help to stop a lot of cheating. So these cards must be worn. The cards should be largish and be worn in a prominent position so that all the details can be read easily.
These cards will show whether a person is an officer or a representative. But because it is so important for people to be able to recognise these leaders perhaps such people need to be issued with badges as well. The membership officer is the natural officer to be in charge of these matters. I will show later that this membership officer will be one of the most important officers in the village.


In the current world, the size of a person’s income is exceedingly important. And people’s incomes vary enormously. But the simple fact of life is that the real needs of all people are roughly the same. Thus, during an emergency period, we want people’s incomes to be much more equal because we only want a person’s income to be just sufficient to cover what they really need. So people’s incomes must be much more equal. Also we specifically want the leaders of our community to set a good example to the rest of the people. Thus our officers, representatives and supervisors must receive the same income as all other normal people – so this means no one should expect too much. So this is my major task in this section – to set out such a practical, egalitarian, but just, remuneration system.
            But, I know what you are thinking – if everyone receives the same income then there will be no incentive for people to work hard. But this is not really true. The majority of people work, or help people, simply for the recognition that the work they are doing is helping their community and their friends. And, if people receive this recognition and are given an adequate income, then they will mostly do a reasonable job. In this proposed system people will most definitely receive their just recognition because everyone will be able to see precisely what is going on - who the leaders are and who is doing the work. And this will all be written down for public inspection. So in this system people will tend to receive just recognition as their incentive to do a good job - rather than simply money. So the system should work on this basis.


During this emergency period, people will not need a great deal of remuneration because a lot of items will be provided free. Thus accommodation, medical facilities, education and public transport to work will all be provided free. And there will be no taxation. Also the essential food and other items that people need to live on will be provided reasonably cheaply at the village shop. My suggestion is therefore the following - all normal adult healthy people will be paid at a rate of $10 per hour. And this rate applies to all officers, representatives and supervisors as well.


In the current world a lot of people are working harder and longer than is necessary – often to buy goods that they don’t really need. I want to avoid this situation. Also I think it is much better for a community if the total work-load is equally divided between everyone. So I will put limits on the amount of work people can do. My proposal is that - all people must only average 30 hours per week over the full year. So a normal healthy person could have an approximate income of $300 per week.
            We must also follow normal practise and everyone fill in a weekly time-sheet specifying the precise hours they worked that week. And, as normal, the person’s supervisor must check and sign this sheet. These sheets will naturally form the basis for everyone’s weekly pay (in fact they could simply be taken to the bank). And all officers, representatives and supervisors would have to fill in their time-sheets as well. All supervisors would naturally be checked by the officer of their department. As regards representatives then the village representative could act as their supervisor to check their time sheets. And the “supernal officer” can act as supervisor in checking the village officers themselves. Also all these sheets must be kept for public inspection so that all people can check that absolutely no one is cheating on the times they claim. My knowledge of life is that supervisors try to cheat - just as much as everyone else tries to cheat.
            But, to make sure people aren’t also blatantly slacking, when they are supposed to be working, I want to add two more conditions. These are:
1)         People must work with the expectation that the public can see what they are doing. I know sometimes people will work in private homes. But, if this is the case, people can simply leave the door open to allow other people to come in.
2)         While working, people must wear an easily seen symbol to show they are supposed to be working. For example this symbol might be a small red head-band.
People then could only fill in their time-sheets for the time when these two conditions apply. So everyone can see what people are doing when they are supposed to be working. I think this situation would be sufficient to make sure most people were working when they were supposed to be working.


In the current world, there is a huge gulf between those people who are employed and those people who are not employed. Now in my system I have tried to make sure that most people do some work. However there will still be many people who are not capable of working in the usual manner - e.g. they might be too young, too old, invalids or busy looking after their own young children. But even here I think it is still best if these people still consider themselves to be working - in any slight manner that is beneficial to the community.
Thus children at school can regard themselves to be working – because in one sense they certainly are. And mothers who are looking after their young children are also certainly working in another manner. Also old people or invalids can sit outside some of the day and check that everyone else is doing the right thing. Thus they can check that drivers are being careful about young children. Or children are not pinching other people’s flowers or fruit. And also they can check that people are working when they are supposed to be working. This activity is still useful to the community.
And then these people can fill out a time sheet in the same way that a normal working person does. And similarly these people must have supervisors who check their time-sheets. But these people’s rates of pay should probably be less - e.g. perhaps $7.50 an hour for a maximum of 20 hours a week. So these people would then only have an income of $150 per week. But I think it is far better for the health of the community that welfare be paid for these beneficial actions rather than simply via pensions or child endowment payments. It is good for everyone to feel that they are helping the community in some manner, in return for the financial support they receive.


Then the big question is of course will this remuneration system work and will everyone be able to buy the things they need to live? As regards essentials it certainly should work because Australia has everything it needs to support itself and everyone would have enough money to buy these essentials. But as regards the non-essentials the situation should be a little uncertain. People will still be able to use private cars, buy fancy clothes and alcoholic beverages. But because these items are non-essential they should bear a high special tax. So they will be expensive and most people would not be able to use or buy these items as much as they do now. People shouldn’t be simply able to have everything they want. It is not good for them. But in this system most people should still be able to afford to have a small amount of luxury. And finally this special tax can be adjusted suitably to limit the demand. So, by adjusting either the rates of pay or the special tax, the system can be adjusted to make it work. (The special tax could be at two levels – a low rate for non-essential items, and a much higher rate for real luxury items.) There should be no problem.



7.         The Law and Problem People


In the current world, the police centres tend to be situated in the municipal areas and the law courts tend to be situated in the various regional centres. So these functions can be left exactly as they are.
            But now the major employers of all people will be the various village communities themselves. Now in the capitalist system, when an employee does something wrong, then the employee is usually given the sack. This is their punishment. But if the employer is the village community itself then it will not be so easy to give a person the sack - because then there may not be anywhere else where this person can go to get further employment. So this is the problem that this section is all about.


But surprisingly, each village centre has the capacity to solve this punishment problem in a far better way than any of our current capitalist methods can – i.e. the sack, a fine or imprisonment.
            In case you haven’t noticed the fact – our village communities will be rather boring in a way. Our communities allow their people to live a healthy lifestyle with adequate food, accommodation and a sensible amount of employment. But this lifestyle will not be wildly exciting. All the exciting features of life will lie outside the village areas – i.e. the beaches, the surf, the national parks, the cinemas, entertainment centres and all the big shops. So, if you live in a village, the village can punish a person for a while by simply rescinding a person’s right to leave their village. And this is easy to do because all people, outside their homes, must wear an identification card. So all the village needs to do is to change this card to indicate this person no longer has the right to leave the village. And then the person must stay in the village for the given penalty time. And just in the village they can live and work as normal. But their options for exciting amusements will be heavily limited.


However such a system could be giving too much power to the village community. In Australia all people have the right to seek employment where they like. And this situation should continue. So if a village wishes to punish a person by rescinding their external citizenship for a while, then the person should first have the right to go and live elsewhere. So we must accept this right. But if the person can’t move elsewhere because no other village will accept them (or the person doesn’t wish to move), then the rescinding of external citizenship will be a remarkably easy and effective form of punishment. And the punishment need not be extreme – thus the limitation might only apply for a few weeks.

So now we come to the question of how such a system can be implemented. And we want our method to be clearly fair and just and our method to be seen and understood by everyone in the village.
            The first question should naturally be – who should be in charge of the operation? And the answer to this question is clearly – the membership officer. This is because all possible penalties are associated with a change or a limitation of citizenship rights.
            I think the general procedure then should be the following. If any person has a complaint (or they suspect wrong-doing by a village person), then they write the details down and give this document to the membership officer. The membership officer files this document both under the accused and the accuser’s names. To these same files, all supervisors will add their regular assessments of the person’s work contribution. Then, if the membership officer feels that an offence needs investigating, the officer will take the whole matter to the weekly representatives meeting. And at this meeting, all the associated people must also be present. Here, having heard the full case, the representatives can make their decision.
            If such a system is to work then, not only must the wrongdoer be punished in some manner, but, the people who gave the initial evidence and brought the case to the meeting, must be applauded and given their just recognition for their good work. It is essential that a villages justice system should work and the good people who help the system work must be recognised for the work they have done. So perhaps an old person, who has been watching what goes on in his street, might feel they have earned their income in some slight manner.
            This village system of justice is a system that relies on the community people to do all the work rather than a special police force. To help in this process, all the citizens of the village can also be provided with whistles. And then, when anyone blows a whistle, this would be a call to everyone around to join together and apprehend any person that was doing something wrong. So the village itself would really look after its own law enforcement. And everyone in this village could see with their own eyes whether justice was being done.


So now we have a good open system and this system will effectively curb the bad activities of the problem people in the village. But unfortunately this system doesn’t stop problem people from other villages entering this village and causing problems. And as you know in Australia, as in most nations, everyone is allowed to go wherever they like.
            If we want to ensure all villages are genuinely safe, then we must rescind this right. I think the way we currently allow gangs of wild-looking bikies to descend on small villages, as they like, is a stupid right. And it is now very easy to stop this practise because the village areas are clear and if people don’t have the village membership, then they can’t automatically go there.
            But of course we still wish to allow people’s friends and relations to visit them in the villages. This activity can be organised very easily. Thus suppose a person has a friend who wants to visit them. Then the person would first meet the visitor when they get off the bus at the village centre. Then they would both go to the membership office and a duplicate copy of the village person’s identity card would be attached to their visitor’s identity card. Then these two cards would tell the village people that the honesty of the visitor is guaranteed by their friend. And then the visitor could wander around the village just as they like.


This system means that there would now be very little opportunity for crime. And with this system it would be very easy to control the supply of drugs because anyone, who was found to be connected with such activities, would quickly have their travelling rights rescinded. And also any addicts would be confined to the village and there they would have no access to drugs at all. So our villages would be very safe healthy areas – and this is found to be true of all real villages the world over. But such villages might not be very exciting.



8.         Returning Back to Normal Life


I said at the beginning of this tract that, at the end of the emergency period, all assets would be returned completely to their previous owners. But this does not mean that those assets will now have the same financial value. This would be impossible because circumstances may have changed. Thus the value of people’s cars might have dropped because, with a good public transport system, people might need fewer cars. And so the price would drop. So people would receive their old assets – but their value might not be the same.
            But in the case of houses with mortgages there is a calculation problem. The owners can only receive the proportion of the house they owned when the period started. And the rest must belong to the various banks and their investors. And these proportions must be worked out in detail. And with large industrial concerns there is even more calculation that must be done.
            And finally we cannot allow any person to be in debt. It is not legal for anyone to own part of another person. So anyone, who holds money that implies another person is in debt, must say farewell to that money.


During this emergency period, most people would have changed their job. But some people in the essential services might still be holding the same job. And these people would now have an advantage over the other people who had to change their job. This is because it is always easier to continue doing the same job and also a person remaining in the same job accumulates more seniority and superannuation. I believe that it would be healthier and just if everyone had to change their jobs during the emergency period. So everyone should be forced to change their job in some way. A change of jobs is good for all of us. And this makes the new situation just for everyone.


If you think about these two problems carefully then you should realise that the emergency period should probably last for at least two years. This is because it will take people this amount of time to adjust to the new situation and to prepare to return to life as normal. And if the purpose is also to adjust to climate change as well then the period might be three or four years.
            In the case of climate change adjustment there is also a further calculation that must be made. During the emergency period, most houses would have had the four features mentioned in section 5 added to them so that they can easily cope by just using solar energy. But these new features initially must belong to the people who did the work - rather than the owners of the houses. And a similar situation applies to the land improvement done on the associated agricultural land. Also, at the end of the emergency period, some people might have a significant bank balance accumulated during the emergency period. So the correct thing to do is to say that all these new assets belong to the people of the village in proportion to the size of their final village bank balance. Of course this situation will quickly be transferred into a new financial position and so the house-owners will soon buy their new additions from the village people who now own them. But nevertheless this process will require some very careful calculation.


Before we return to the old capitalistic system, we should also check that everyone can cope with the return - and in particular that everyone can get another job. This won’t be easy - as was found at the end of the Second World War. What happened then was that the rich were taxed much more highly both in terms of income tax and death duties. And these taxes meant that the poorer people, returning from war, could cope and eventually find a job. But it took time. Adjusting to a new system is never very easy.
            I think we should consider having to do a similar thing. Over the past few decades the position of young people wishing to buy a house and start a family has become steadily worse. This is because a many older people have become much richer and they have bought up all the convenient land and houses in our cities. So young people can no longer afford accommodation in the city. But this situation would be rapidly rectified if all people had to pay tax on all assets that are more than the average person holds. If people had to pay a tax of 2% per year on all assets above the average, then people could still earn an income on their extra assets– but nothing like as much. So many of the rich would be forced to sell their large houses, and then the price of houses would drop. Then the young poorer people could once again afford to buy more dense accommodation in the cities (e.g. the terrace houses or the flats that always abound in the older cities).
            This is a very complex question and I don’t wish to argue about the situation too closely. All I wish to say here is that, before we return to the old capitalistic system, the new situation must be thoroughly and hotly debated by everyone. This is an enormously important question. And we also have to bear in mind that, when we return to the capitalist system, most of the media will again be owned and controlled by the rich. And hence the argument will be heavily biased in favour of the rich. So we must settle this difficult question while the rich still don’t have their customary power.



9.         Conclusion – a very different type of alternative


These days no one lives in old-fashioned villages like I am suggesting in these pages as a temporary measure. The world has moved on from such things. Instead we now all live in one huge global village where:

• We can contact anyone we like in a few seconds using our mobile phones,

• We can go on yearly holidays to international resorts in the most exciting of places,

• We can buy wonderful foods and goods at our local mall imported from all over the world,

• We can find any fact we want about anywhere in a couple of minutes on the Internet.


But one of the nasty aspects of this global village of ours, and one which we always try to avoid thinking about, is this – is it safe? And, in one sense, it certainly isn’t. This is because, if we are now dependent on the rest of the world for our food, goods and employment, then, if the global system breaks down, then the whole world will go down the gurgler in one fell swoop. And, in the first section of this work, I described how our global system could easily fail.
Now, if the global system should fail, then the sensible thing to do, as a temporary measure, is to choose a different system that puts safety as its number one priority. And simple old me believes that the safest system is a system where we can see and understand everything that goes on. And in small villages everyone can see and understand everything that does go on. And furthermore in my villages:

• Every suburban village is allotted their own agricultural land in the country. So the village itself assures its own people
of their own food supply.
• The suburban village itselfgives employment to everyone in its village area.
• The suburban village runs itself and chooses all its own officials.

So each village has the complete capacity to be completely safe.
            But I don’t want to hide from the disadvantages of this community village-based system. Thus:

• Most people in the village will have to walk to the village centre (about 300 meters) at least once a day.
• A lot of people, who are not used to it, might have to do some physical work. And this work might be away in the
village’s agricultural land.
• Everyone would tend to know what everyone else was doing. So we have to say farewell to some of our privacy.
• If we indulge in some minor misdemeanours, we might be punished by having to stay at home in our boring old village
for a week or so.
• And the most important final point is that the village might not run itself very well. And even worse still, because every
choice and decision that people make is recorded, then the precise reason why the community was being badly run can
be found out. Thus, suppose a corrupt official caused the problem. Then the representatives who voted for this official
will be known and the people who chose these representatives themselves will also be known. So we might find out it
was we ourselves who caused the problem. This would be most embarrassing. We don’t want these sorts of facts to get
out. So everyone might have to be more careful about who they choose to represent them and how they vote.


So there will be advantages and disadvantages in this temporary community system I am proposing. But the point I wish to make now is that this temporary system will be very different from the global capitalist system we are living in at the moment. Thus our current system is built on the concepts of – economic growth, consumerism, globalism, capitalism and the individual search for wealth. But this temporary system is based on the concepts of – equality, safety, health, local-community and a relaxed manner of living. So this temporary system will be very different from the current way we live.
            Now I am not saying which is the best system. {I have devoted my life to thinking about how we should live. So I have written two very complex books about how we ought to live. But no one will read these books. I don’t think that either our capitalist system or this temporary system is an adequate way of living. But people are too busy generating economic growth at the moment to have any time left to think about sensible ways of living.}
            However, during this temporary emergency period, people will have plenty of time to think about how they ought to live. And they will have two very different ways of living to choose from i.e. the capitalist system or this temporary system. So, with a bit of luck, at the end of the emergency period people might choose a new political system and this new system might have the best features of both these systems.

            But choosing a better political system is a very hard problem indeed – I have worked out new systems - so I know. The easiest thing to do would be for everyone to simply revert to the old capitalistic system once more. But at least then everyone will know that, if ever the capitalistic system gets too bad, then they can revert to this simple temporary community system once again. And from this position people can repeat the cycle. A system that swaps between capitalism and community-based democratic communism could be a surprisingly good system.




You might now also like to look back at:

either my "Home Page" (which introduces this whole website and lists all my webpages),

or Political Fundamentals (which introduces this major set of webpages).


My next normal webpage is A Summary of my Political Solutions.


Updated on 10/11/2016.