How to disrupt a democracy — to create a democracy (with the help of AI)

Sorry! We do not currently live in a democracy. But here is how we could create an actual democracy. With the help of artificial intelligence:

After months of campaigning, voting and then negotiations, we have finally got a new government in Denmark. But that made me think….

Yes – I voted for the political party, that I agree with the most, but is this really a democracy? And why can so many political parties successfully get away with campaigning on very vague “feel good talk” and stating the obvious such as

• We have to take good care of the children.
• The sick must have a proper treatment.
• The elderly must have a right to proper care.
• Everyone should have the right to good and healthy life (and free healthcare).
• There should be room for everyone.
• We stand together and will make our country great again.

Who can disagree with that? No one!

Yet, this is the kind of rhetoric that you’ll hear very often in political campaigns. After all, we all want the best for our country. The question is just how we achieve it. There are many roads to choose from, with many different solutions. Some right and some wrong. But that is exactly what the political debate should be exclusively about; actual solutions to actual problems.

Stop talking about the obvious and instead let’s do a debate focused around the actual challenges, the actual solutions and our options towards fixing or improving those challenges. And let’s demand full transparency and all cards on the table for these solutions. The good and the bad.

But that takes us to the #1 problem of the modern democracy:
Try to notice carefully how almost all politician’s respond to questions. Most often, they do not actually respond at all. They only respond with practiced phrases, which either doesn’t make sense or no one can really disagree with. Why? Because they shouldn’t risk pushing away potential voters and thereby harming or weakening their own power or potentially gained power.

Politicians practice in responding evasively and not giving concrete answers – and a politician’s number one rule?: DO NOT – EVER - DO YES / NO ANSWERS. Because a yes or a no answer is almost binding and irreversible. At least that’s their theory. Politicians would rather express no opinion at all, than ending up with expressing an unpopular opinion. In worst case they will even lie or completely and manipulatively evade a question, because saying yes or no, would maybe gain 1% more voters, but lose 2%.

Why do we accept it? Some voters just don’t care and vote for a politician because they favor or have said “the obvious”, that the voter agrees with, such as something similar to the aforementioned bullet points. And the voter is not aware, that they are actually being manipulated.

IT IS JUST NOT RIGHT! Politicians should not be allowed to get away with it.

Politics has become a game filled with advisors, spin doctors, strategies and plans, to say what is popular, to win votes, to win power. They do not represent society, they do not represent you and me – they represent themselves.

The road to power and the power in itself has become more important than the real needs of the country and the people, that the politicians represent. Win the power at whatever cost – even if we must lie and promise things to our voters, that may be unrealistic.

This is why political alienation is on a constant rise and confidence in the democratic system and process is decreasing. More and more people start realizing what’s going on.

The problem? Centralized decision making!

I’m actually not a supporter of democracy in its present form. Many people do not fully understand or know what the consequence of their vote can result in, because people get almost no transparency and really they don’t have much influence any way — if any at all.

Power seems to become more and more centralized every day. Decisions are made by politicians, that are completely out of touch with reality and are so distanced, from the the people it impacts, that they could just as well sit uninformed, on the other side of the earth and decide what’s best for you and me. It makes no sense!

The solution? Decentralized decision making!

We need a massive political disruption and decentralization, so that relevant decisions are made closer to the individual citizen – or even to be decided directly by the citizen. That is the only right way forward and it’s the only way to run an actual democracy.

Countries with highly centralized power DOES – NOT – WORK. No matter if it has happened through an election process or not.

What the 100% right solution is, is of course difficult to answer. But the solution to creating a real democracy, can be something like removing politicians, voting for ministers, based on their relevant experience and knowledge, and working towards setting up a committee whose only sole purpose is to prepare choices and impartial uncover consequences of the choices X, Y and Z. And then let the people or small communities, vote for the final decision.

As many decisions as possible, should be made as close as possible to the relevant individual / influenced citizen.

In the near future, it could perhaps be artificial intelligence that came with the different options and then the people voted for the final decisions – of course on a fully enlightened, impartial and transparent basis. Without any hidden agendas. We just need the right technology to make it possible.

One of the unsolved questions are of course: Who should make the difficult decisions? The tough decisions, that everyone is against, but is for the better.

Are Mr. and Mrs. Jones, Average Joe and John Doe up to such a task and responsibility? Maybe not.

So should we put that power in the hand of an elected president or minister? Preferably not!

Maybe an artificial intelligence could do it for us? Definitely not!
— but maybe it’s necessary. The evil good.

So – of course there are some gaps in this kind of democracy approach of the future. But when politics today is mostly about power, and not so much about a real democratic agenda – is it then really a democracy?