c1) Democracy

{ Note:- I am releasing the restriction of Copy Rights for this page. Readers are now free to discuss, copy, translate or criticize the materials. The Copy Rights of all other pages remain restricted. } This very long page has just been partially trimmed and brushed up (12th Nov 2007).  

Brief introduction :- In 1989 I wrote a long letter and asked a friend (through his son) to pass it on personally to the former senior Chinese leader Mr. Deng Xiao Ping. I was fortunate because my friend thought what I wrote was meaningful and agree to do it. I was hoping to present my views and urged the senior leader to open up China with bolder steps. In that letter I praised democracy and discussed various impending international trends, including the upcoming surge of interest in computer and music, etc., and also mentioned about my theory of the Regenerating Universe. I was highly encouraged by the positive reaction given by Mr. Deng who then passed on my letter to other leaders in Beijing. Then came Saddam Hussein's invasion of Kuwait, which strongly alarmed me. I thought I had not discussed enough international problems in that first letter and decided to supplement it with a second letter (please click to read) to be passed on through the same route. In this longer second letter, I talked about Saddam Hussein and also brought up the prolonged problems in Gaza. I suggested that King Hussein of Jordan could mediate for peace between Israel and Palestine. Then I send copies of both letters to Secretary General Mr. Butros Butros Ghali at UN's 50th Anniversary. President Clinton took action and got Itzak Rabin and Arafat to shake hands on the White House lawn through the mediation of King Hussein... Unfortunately, Itzak Rabin was soon assassinated and both conflicts in the Gulf and in Gaza escalated. Since then hundreds of thousands of life have been lost. Yet, what sparked me to write those two letters was in fact a hunch that the arrival of Halley comet could trigger off sudden release of both ecological and social energies, accumulated over long time and waiting to explode. This could bring about waves of heightened and abnormal human activities, both good and bad, resulting in great social changes, some of which could have serious consequence in the nuclear weapon age. As a result I consider that there are 3 large time bombs that would go of sooner or later, i.e. Democracy, Political Religion and the Nuclear Bomb. But if and when they do go off, it will be too late to write about...             

This page is about certain kind of democracy that is spreading fast across the human world. I say certain kind because the original meaning of democracy has been altered. We can therefore describe democracy in two kinds, i.e. true democracy and apparent democracy. Historically, true democracy existed in two ancient regions. 1) Ancient Greece :- It began in Athens around 680 BC, and in the so called "City States" where the populations were usually small (less than 10,000). In such democratic City States, because of their small population, it was possible for the whole population to form the entire State Legislature, called "Demos Kratos" (Demos means People, and Kratos means Rule). So every citizen (females not included) became responsible for the business of government. 2) Ancient China :- There were 3 stages. Firstly, Chinese civilization was mainly centralized some 5000 years ago by one Huang-Di, or Yellow Emperor, whose great great grandson Emperor Yau decided that his own son was not fit to rule. Yau searched amount the populace and found a promising young man called Shun. He brought him to the palace, then tested and trained him for some years to do the job, and upon satisfaction, he abdicated in Shun's favour. Emperor Shun continued the tradition by abdicating in favour of Emperor Yue who had spent 13 years in curbing floods and channeling many rivers (the writer is a descendant of this man)... In the second stage, it was the time about 600 BC, which is parallel to the time of early City State democracy in Greece, Confucius initiated the philosophy for each individual in following orders :- a) Analysis of Matters, b) acquisition of knowledge, c) Self Refinement, d) Harmonizing family, e) Governing the State, e) Creating peace of the world... For the time being, let me call this "Confucian Philosophy of Universal Democracy".  Lastly, the third stage, by Tang Dynasty, 618 AD, imperial China began choosing all government officials by 3 levels of academic examinations, i.e. the local, the provincial and the state exams. 

This system of democracy by written exams was named "Exam Raised" ( ), which lasted about 1300 years in China until the end of the last imperial dynasty nearly a century ago. Unfortunately, this system of democracy by academic exams was destroyed beyond repair by the new republican KMT government in the revolution of 1910, who wanted to replace it with the widely celebrated Western style democracy. It was the time when the entire world of common people rose to take over political power from the traditional monarchies and the America and French revolutions were still fresh in memory. It was the height when the revolutionary ideas of people's rule were highly admired and widely written about. Thomas Jefferson's "All men are created equal" and Abraham Lincoln's Three People Principle, i.e., "For the People, By the People and Of the People" were introduced into China and became widely publicized and quickly accepted. This happened especially because prior to the revolution China had suffered more than 100 years of invasion of the rampant and uncontrollable opium drugs and opium wars. Above all, t he imperial administration had fallen into the hands of one enfant emperor and his totally ignorant grand mother, Empress Tshe Shi. Needles to say China was in a deep hell over run by corrupt officials and drug cartels. Yet that's not all, after the revolution almost as soon as the system of political parties were introduced to China, one party, the KMT Party, tried to annihilate its rival, the Communist Party, and civil wars ensued that lasted 20 years, even while Japan soldiers were already rampaging China. So, imagine after more than a century of uncontrollable drowning in thick opium smoke nation wide, which brought about opium wars, opium treaties, totally rotten imperial administrations, only to be followed by revolution, civil wars, Sino-Japan War, and finally by Second World War, life and proper political life in China had been totally disrupted for more than one and a half centuries...  And yet, the name of Chinese "Exams Raise" democratic system was not even called "Democracy". That is why this single precious legacy of true democracy in human history was not even heard about by most people in the world...  

It goes without saying, after prolonged national mayhem and pandemonium, the first duty for any man, or woman, or leader, was to struggle for survival above all other things. As a result, no one in China had the luxury to relax, until now, to think and remember how wise and precious their ancestors had left behind those centuries and millenniums of truly democratic, humanitarian cultural and political legacies. Indeed, for 5000 years ancient Chinese leaders had ruled only with the consent and approval of people, with wisdom and principle of harmonious, moralistic, democratic and humanitarian philosophy, instead of rule by absolute divine power, military conquest or political rhetoric and oratories. Through more than 2000 years of Confucius teaching, China was a mainly harmonious society without frequent or violent tribal or fractional or partied political conflicts. It was simply a cultured, moralistic, practical and harmonious society. It goes so deep and runs so long in the Chinese veins that even today those simple rural folks still can only be led with humane and moralistic qualities. But also because it has run so silently in Chinese blood for so long that most people, both Chinese and non-Chinese, have mistaken that democracy had existed only in the West alone. In fact, the "Exam Raised" democracy was the biggest, longest and truest democratic system of governance ever existed in human history. The Exam Raised system not only afforded each scholar to get qualified in subjects of science, literature, mathematics and sociology, it also allowed participants to express their written ideology, aspirations and commitments in governance before they actually take those responsibilities. That's why the Chinese society was harmonious by nature after the introduction of Confucian Universal Democracy and the Exam Raised democratic system...    

In short, true democracy existed for a brief moment in Ancient Greece and for about 1300 years in China. These are the only people who ever knew what democracy really stands for. Only in Greece it was meant that the State was administrated by all people, educated or not, but in China it was administered by people chosen through exams, whereby scholars voluntarily and indiscriminately entered to be tested and qualified. Each candidate must compete in intelligence and prove his capacity for the job. Therefore for 1300 years Chinese government was administered by the qualities of intelligence and morality of leadership. Above all, a candidate could also express his aspirations, his belief and his written commitments to his job before he took it. Unfortunately, modern democracy is nothing but politics. It is not designed to create and bring about a harmonious and peaceful national political life. Instead, it is often full of fights, even cheatings, corruptions and in some countries riots, instability, violent bloodshed, civil wars between powerful political parties or political fractions. The individual, no matter how able and noble he or she may be, has no chance to serve the nation without the will and support of the most powerful party or parties. Yet, our world has advanced now deep into the age of nuclear weapons and nuclear technologies. There looms the threat of global warming, and the eventuality that someday the underground oils must run out. Some nations are already dependent on nuclear energy for more than half of their national power generation. Nuclear technicians are everywhere to be bought and employed. Any intrinsic national political conflicts will eventually evolve international subversions, secret global political alliance, arm sales, support or provocation of national disunity and other open or secret confrontations. International confrontations will develop into nuclear arms race and finally  into inevitable nuclear confrontations. International treaties could become meaningless in the presence of political and military threats. People are not even afraid of ending their own lives these days...Yes, these are the realities of today, a stand off of escalating situation without a foreseeable end. It is also the naked picture of Western Democracy with its intent and its consequence...  

Indeed, there are nations that would forcibly change other nations' government and impose on them faulty democracy or confrontational political systems that produce nothing but arguments, conflicts and civil wars. It appears that other world politicians are alarmed and beginning to seek nuclear weapon protection. Who wouldn't? So, it's expectable that roughly speaking about 20 to 30 years from now, our world could be in a major nuclear confrontation. Meanwhile, western democracy has boasted itself up so high and mighty to already symbolize the only just and rightful prototype of human governance, even human behavior. Such dangerous notion is bound to turn the world into a chained reacting and revolting total mess. All traditions, social bondages and precious crystallizations of human civilizations would become subjects for attack, while those untrue make-belief things, even entertainment medias, would enlarge to teach young folks more make belief violence and killings All these things are becoming the ticking time bombs for the 21st nuclear century. It is therefore imperative now to examine what that Democracy really is! What it is really made of and what it really stands for, before more nations would send armies and bombers to change other nations' governments. 

These things happen coincidentally in the days when our home Hong Kong is trying hard to work out a suitable political system that would not only satisfy modern conditions but also carry on that harmonious, trouble free, successful and meaningful spirit and tradition of real democracy of the past, so that not only the Hong Kong Chinese people, but also all the foreign residents and business investors in Hong Kong, would enjoy a harmonious society with continued economic prosperity. It is also why many Chinese people today are hesitant to adopt fully that western style democracy, and trying to introduce more choice into the future system. In the up-coming passages the writer will try to scrutinize the pros and cons of the so called democracy unreservedly, because it is not only vital for Hong Kong but for the world as well, in this dangerous nuclear age... I sincerely welcome world wide discussions as well as criticisms on my writings. 

                                ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Modern democracy is basically consisted of power grabbing political parties. One begins the system by first slitting up the nation into fighting and power grabbing fractions. Half the time the parties blame each other and thereby may produce some limited positive and competitive results. The other half of time, they devote their efforts to strengthen their party interests and control of the nation. Their organized interests dominate the electoral system, making it practically impossible for an outstanding independent individual to serve the country. Thus year by year the parties grow in strength to dominate, and year by year the individual loses control of his State. In between everything becomes political rhetoric, and gradually the rhetoric turns a society into a patriotic force, and sometimes a military power. The flames of collective patriotic energies gradually cause international dominance or wars and invasions. Nowadays political and military confrontational energies could bring mankind steps closer to nuclear 3rd world war. Meanwhile, in order to win the votes and popularity contest, the politicians avoid moral issues and encourage random freedom without moral concerns, calling that human rights. Many forms of control and restrain become anti human rights, thus gradually making the society randomly free, immoral and criminal. As immorality and criminality grow rich and powerful, eventually the world admires and follows. Since everything becomes political rhetoric, the world also becomes a political battle field. Medias become a great power and influence to control and tailor the mind, and hence the controversial slogan "Press Freedom"... 

Due to the influence and belief of brutal ancient politics and religions, and due to the discovery of bronze sword in the early Bronze Age as against those who had not discovered metal weapons, some nations had quickly and easily conquered and over run vast areas of the ancient world. Many of these cultures had developed and acquired the belief and traditions of wars and conquest. The fatal experiences of acquiring deadly weapon before others had influenced the quick and rapid escalation of the Iron Age, which had since developed into many advanced modern weapons. Thus history has shown that it was the early acquisition of deadly weapon that decides the fate of nations. It also reflects the fact, or rather the possibility, that any nation, foolish enough to stop modernization of weapons, is in fact committing its own future suicide. Only most people are still in their merry dreams and are unaware of such historical backgrounds and that history was made by weapons alone. This would now mean that the Prevention of Nuclear Weapons must be absolutely effective, controlled and adhered by all nations and not just a few.  [Note: People are also unaware of what democracy could do in the Nuclear Age. Now the danger looms high that even after the lesson of democratic election and support for Hitler to wedge Second World War, today's democracy can still give legal and constitutional support to those relentless desires for invasion and victory proposed by modern leaders, which will someday have to lead to another world war. The coming days are long and dark for all of us under the threat of nuclear wars, but it probably wouldn't bother some leader of democracy... Man who would be elected by "Universal Suffrage" under "One Man One Vote"... Because any universally franchised leader would have the right to insist and pursuit victory till the end...]  

Some those warring and conquering powers had also brought slaves and colonial immigrants to become parts of their own society. The result is a fractionalized society with great divisions of classes and ethnicities as well as hidden injustices and explosive social energies. To keep such energies contained, democracy or the slogans of democracy or equality, becomes a natural necessity, true or not true. However, other human societies that did not take in slaves or colonial immigrants continue to function in unchanged conditions with old traditional belief and cultures developed and crystallized by regional history over thousands of years. Their historic stability is now being forced to break up by the call of democracy, thus falling into fractionalized societies with political parties, causing disputes or power struggles, even bloodshed without knowing the real cause of problem. Recently democracy has also become a tool for invasion. By trumpeting up the false democracy and elections, and by splitting up a subject nation into political parties, then followed by assisting one party to succeed, one can easily break up the stability or tradition of that nation, and ending up in controlling that nation. Such modern maneuvers can cause civil war and wash the society with blood, which would then provide more excuses for increase of assistance or use of force. This was the story of China after the 1910 revolution... And yet, is democracy truly so democratic? I think it warrants thorough looking into!

In fact, after hundreds of years of practice, modern democracy is still not true democracy as it was in the days of historic democracy in Athens or in the legacy of ancient Chinese Tang dynasty. Instead, modern democracy has intrinsically become an energy of argument, unrest and split, and not an energy of national unity, and continues to be so. Dictators like Hitler are the result of such democracy too. Meanwhile, another negative development is that there are nations with parties, which have learned to tolerate each other, and in reality, they collude and share the power and riches of the nation quietly for many generations. Such nations are also called democracy. They may appear more stable and peaceful, but the reality is that people or voters can only have either one party strongman or the other, and have no other choice. As such systems become more deeply rooted each day, people are losing control to it by the day. After inauguration of power, a party strongman can rise to become an absolute authority, acting  in defiance to the will and demands of the nation.  As political parties become more powerful and arrogant, they are bringing their people closer and closer to the threat of nuclear world war. Unfortunately, voters think that taking part in election is the ultimate expression of democracy. Modern people have forgotten that the whole purpose of election is find the best qualified, the wisest, the most mature and the most humane qualities of leadership. The entire future of peace, strength, prosperity and hope of the nation depend on its leadership, but such qualities cannot be found in the political rhetoric and in the self interests of political parties. Such fatally important quality leadership cannot be obtained from two or more party strongmen. And yet, true democracy did exist in ancient Greece and especially for many long centuries in China. When an exam candidate puts down his written aspirations and commitments in governance, he must keep them during his national service. And since there was no inflaming political rhetoric, nor fighting political parties, that's why historic Chinese people never inflamed the nation to go for war and external conquests. And what's more, now they find it difficult to ignore such basic controversy in modern democracy...        

In view of the fact that mankind is now living in the age of nuclear technology, and the next world war is bound to be a nuclear war. Also I have little doubt that global warming cannot be stopped without nuclear energy, I have little choice but to point out, without reservation, that there are 3 time bombs slowly ticking away, i.e. Political religion, False democracy and the Nuclear Bomb itself.  Recently some politicians have tried to export Western style democracy all over the world, not knowing that they had merely ignited the fuse. However, the burning of fuse also calls for urgent exposure of true nature of the bomb to come to the surface. The revelation shows that by comparing what democracy should actually be, the modern democracy is in fact truly undemocratic and dangerous. The bomb is full of dynamites, and could easily go off before very long. To help warning why it could go off and what the bomb is made of, I have listed 30 ingredients of its explosive chemicals in the following, although there are lots more than just 30. Later on I shall also list over 30 examples of very recent troubles in the nations of democracy around the world. Then finally I shall suggest a couple of ideas for an improved system towards the end of this page :- :-

List of Principle Problems on Modern Democracy:-  

The followings are some of the more serious complains contained in modern democracy, that need to be exposed  :-

1) Under any democratic electoral system with political parties, the large parties control every election. For too many centuries and in too many the political parties have served to screen out un-preferred and un-favored candidates by choice of sex and ethnicity. Without the power and support of large parties, candidates from small parties, or from unprivileged ethnic groups, or independent candidates, have zero chance to be elected.  Therefore democracy controlled by political parties does not represent the ideal of equal chance and equal rights, nor the hope of people to elect the best possible quality leader among all nationals. 

2) Multi-party (more than 2 parties) elections do not always give simple majority (i.e. more than 50%). Governments formed by coalition of parties with different party goals do not yield, by nature, stable policies and performance in national affairs, such as  defense or economic matters, etc.. This is a frequent phenomena of multi-party election. (See examples of 2005 elections of Germany and Chile in the upcoming list).

3) Bi-party electoral system is the natural result of evolution from multi-party systems, but it yields the least possible minimum of choice, i.e. only two candidates (one is not a choice. Two is the minimum) designated by the parties and not the choice of the voting public. 

4) Loyalty to party and party politics or party ambitions destroy the aspirations and essence democracy and people's or the nation's real needs. It also provides the chances for frauds and possible cheating in election.

5) Choice of candidates by political parties and party politics do not allow real qualities of candidates to surface, therefore defies and denies the ultimate purpose of election, as well as search of best leadership. The above 5 points already sufficiently destroy the original principles and real goal of democracy.

6) In times of peace and economic stability, a bi-party electoral system very frequently ends up in very close and even voting results (Note: On Nov 18th 2005. Mahinda Rajapakse won Presidential election in Sri Lanka with only 50.29% out of total votes). This give rise to the chance and possibility of preconceived frauds or unfair competition in any stable nation, for instance, if one party could secure or manipulate say an extra  2% to 3%, even just 0.5% votes by hook or by crook ( say in the last vote casting stage ), then that party can be pretty certain of winning the election.   

7) Political parties can easily become the stepping stones for the rich and powerful or the modern aristocrats to rule the land by making use of the party hierarchy and therefore side stepping the process of democracy or people's rule to become modern monarch. In other words, democracy may be controlled by manipulation to become a party candidate, and the possibility exists that election can be swindled with a relatively small amount of winning votes. So, the control of ones party, plus a bit of cheating could land the man on top of hundreds of millions of people. Even without cheating such candidacy stands 50% chance of becoming the head of nation.

However, here lies an even more threatening but real prospect. that is, by exporting or inserting such system into a targeted foreign nation, it becomes possible to take over the entire rule of nation by remote control. This may be carried out with military, political and monetary maneuvers and then make use of such above similar loop holes in electoral system to acquire legality of mandate. Such a juicy proposal is usually an offer that  would not be refused by any collaborating politicians or partners in crime.  

But that's not all, once that targeted nation is under control, it can be used as a tool or a coalition partner for a planned war or for use as coalition for further international political aggressions.  In the end, the control of land and government may be preconceived with plots and obtained with relative ease, even invasions could be preconceived. Therefore democracy under the control of political parties can become a liability for international communities, especially in the age of mass destruction.  All these is not impossible,  yet it would fool the un-aware people and look very democratic indeed. 

8) The manipulation and acquisition of party leadership by the elites and the privileged, not only prevent the chances of real talents within the party, but also produce undemocratic national leadership.  

9) From the above it becomes evident that modern democracy is a disguise for political parties to compete for rule. Political parties are then in turn ruled by modern aristocrats, which was what happened in ancient Roman Republic. when females and unprivileged were barred. People have no choice but to take what's given. Modern universal suffrage means mobilization of masses to confirm and rubber stamp the false system of democracy, and the mandate to make war. The mass participation gives false impression and satisfaction to the grass roots that they are enjoying free will to choose what is already fixed.   

10) Political parties and party politics to acquire national mandates often provide dangerous power base for wars and potential disasters, such as Hitler's NAZI party and Saddam Hussein's BATH party, and numerous other examples. Yet, not all nations with single party rule, or nations with rule of monarchy, instigate wars or produce undesirable or unpopular leadership. Some of the greatest achievements in human history were accomplished under single leadership or leader. It's always the quality of leadership and its concern for the livelihood of people that counts and never the format of election or the politics or wars it produces that really matters. 

11) The limitation of maximum two-term office under modern democracy does not give long enough time and momentum to construct maximum or prolonged social, cultural and economic stability. A proven quality leadership is quickly and prematurely cut off from giving continued desirable influences and performances...    

12) If a leader, elected under such a system, can established a cause to start a war, rightly or wrongly, he stands a good chance to be reelected for the second term due to the predictable national sentiments in times of war. If and when this occurs, the system then becomes a temptation for war and could lead to long term destructive consequence of some unfortunate foreign nations. It could even escalate into bigger and unpredictable international repercussions as well as all sorts of revenge undertakings lasting into unknown future durations and administrations...  

13) Universal suffrage usually includes not only good citizens, but also the uninformed, ignorant, uneducated, unrecorded criminals, rebellions trouble makers, ill intended and the corrupted electorates who do not always produce true electoral results, especially when the candidates are running neck to neck. 

14) Bi-party election usually gives a small wining margin, therefore, in average, almost half the votes, in reality, do not give consent to the final elected mandate. The so called National Mandate is a falsity ( In the above said Sri Lanka election 49.71% voters did not give mandate to Mahinda Rajapakse. In the United States, the Presidential Election 2000 was one of the closest election in United States history. It was decided and won only by 537 votes out of the total of 5,962,657 votes in the "swing state" of Florida. ) 

15) Voter's turn out : According to statistic records from 1960 to 1995 (9 national elections inclusive), the average reported turn out of total eligible voters to cast votes were for instance:  India = 58%, USA = 54%, Switzerland = 54%, Poland = 51% (figures from Mark N. Franklin's "Election Participation"). Such small percentage of eligible voters who actually voted during those 35 years gives false impression of democratic election...  

16) Overall mandate:- The above overall turn-out of electorates still do not include the under aged voters, or any citizens or nationals not yet qualified or disqualified to vote.  Now let's take the USA records as example and take a closer look.  Supposing under aged youth and other disqualified voters amount to 15% (reality is far higher when the disqualified are included. Read more about the disqualified below in blue) of the total population. Deducting this 15%, the total eligible voters now = 85% of the total population. Out of this 85% eligible voters, only 54% of voters turn up to vote, thus the participating voters = 85% x 54% = 45.9% of the national population. Sharing this between two major parties equally = 22.95% each. If the winning party acquires 5% more votes than the losing party, i.e. winning party gets 25.45% and the loser gets = 20.45%. It means that a President would be elected by 25.45% of the total population. Therefore, 74.55% of the national population do not give the President his franchise or mandate. This is not particular for any one President, it's the average for 9 US Presidential Elections from 1960 to 1995.  Hence, if you don't look closely, you will be swept away by the gale winds of press and medias, and would never know that a President is mandated not by the true majority. but always by an actual small minority of only roughly a quarter of the total national population, and yet acting on this minority franchise a President makes fatal decisions on economy and wars. The truth is, the vast majority do not give or empower the President with such mandate and authority.  Yet this is root and very core of Democratic reality

( In fact, there are large allowances in the above calculations. For instance, according to McDonald & Popkin, the ineligible voters consist of about 10% of the total voting-age population in 2004, under age citizens not included (in fact the under-aged group is bigger than any political party). Alone in California State 20% of voting-age population is disqualified to vote, mainly due to criminal records. Besides, voter's turn out includes votes shared by other minority political parties. In the US such parties are: Green Party, Reform Party, Libertarian Party, Constitution Party and Natural Law/Reform Party, etc... These parties take away at least 3% to 5% votes from the total easily. Thus the true percentage of votes cast for the winner is less than 20% in those 9 terms of Presidential Elections in average. If the winning margin happens to be very small and the allowance of 5% wining votes disappears, then the President could be elected by about 15%, of the total population, or even less. 

 

This means the U.S. Presidential mandate is a given only by an insignificant minority of the total population, and the value of democracy is hence also insignificant. Such democracy really means that a small marginal minority rules over the overwhelming majority of the population. In fact, it happens not just once or twice, but always, some over 80% of the population have not explicitly expressed their consent or wish to live under the elected government. So what happens to the hopes and aspirations of those 80% or  more of people? Yet this is the true state, the reality and the system that is now the moral standard, the highest and the most legitimate prototype to be installed by force around the world. Thanks to the drums and trumpets of the medias that continue to blast away the self glorifying values of the Western democracy... We hear so much of the contempt, damnations and ridicules about people living under some oppressive regimes and are afraid to speak out. Now we witness the same thing when people are silenced for fear to be branded as unpatriotic or simply restricted by military rules. )

17) National leadership produced under bi-party or multi-party elections causes fluctuation in domestic and foreign policies, resulting in uncertain and unpredictable government directives and performance once every few years, for instance, one term of rule by one party the government would pursuit a course of peace, the next term of rule by another party the nation would take the course of war, all within a few short years, or even months. (I put emphasis on wars, because wars inflame hatred and escalate fears of attack, of revenge, of terrorism and of nuclear arms race or nuclear warfare, and of course, the reasons for making a "Police State")

18) Party politics is the main cause of organized ballot cheating that one hears all the time. So much and so frequent that the UN and other human watch organizations have to assume a role as observers in elections all over the world to check such possible cheatings. Such checking by a few observers has never been known to produce any useful results..   

19) Above is enough to show that democracy exists only in name and not in substance, but electorates are either completely unaware of it or deliberately kept uninformed. The rights to vote become the rights to rubber stamp the party rule. So the system goes on unchallenged for centuries bearing the impression of citizens' fundamental rights and universal approval, which is gloriously hailed as "Universal Suffrage" or "One man one vote". So much that some politicians and citizens, thanks to press and medias,  would believe it to be the ultimate ideal brand to believe in, or for export.

20) It happens now and then in a nation of Western style democracy that when a national leader's public approval rating drops to well below average, yet the leader doggedly refuses to budge and persists his own way as if nothing has happened, or when Congress, i.e. the representative of people, demand change, yet the leader still single-mindedly goes ahead unperturbed, i.e. all signs show a dangerous dictator is in the making. But the system gives him the mandate and power to do so. Then in the worst scenario that calls for impeachment, it becomes basically impossible to remove the faulty leader, because it requires 2/3 parliamentary votes to do it. With the private interests of his party and party members this 2/3 absolute majority becomes unachievable. The power rests on his party support and not the rest of nation. Such scenario gives dictatorship and renders democracy completely untrue. 

21) The mandate obtained under so called majority consent looms so far above restrains that it permits irretrievable power to corruption, to steal and to offend individual human rights, national rights, and even international rights at will and unchecked anywhere around the world. And yet under the system, ordinary citizens do not even notice it, those who join the parties or have interests in it support it, others are powerless to stop it!

22) The leadership of a nation is an extremely heavy responsibility and serious business that affects the fate of citizens, the nation and often a great part of the world. It requires the best of character, integrity, education, experience, proof of achievement and reputation. The mode of modern voting system controlled by political parties does not give citizens adequate choice of such suitable and responsible qualities of candidates. Instead, party competition turns the business of election into a fanfare of popularity contest. Popularity contest could put an extremist, a fanatic or a political radical, or popular figures with wrong kind of expertise, or perhaps someday even a comedian to be in charge of the fate of people, of nation and probably, of the world. While at the same time, people of great leadership capacities and potentials can only watch in dismay. This is a major mistake in the search of meaningful leadership (Note:- Parents, Doctors, engineers, scientist, inventors, constructors, social workers, business people and workers, philosophers, theoreticians, teachers, artists, slaves, immigrants... all sorts of nation builders, you name it, all work to build an economy or a humane civilization, through centuries or millenniums. But one wrong politician could spend it or destroy it on wars ).     

23) The defects and falsehood in the party controlled democracy are defects in human civilization, which can be rectified and removed by improving the electoral system or by new systems which aim to eliminate controls by conflicting and confrontational parties. While the refusal of rectification and insistence to spread a faulty system all over the world is a certain sign of prolonged hidden global conflict, which the age of mass destruction can ill afford.

24) An election consisting of 3 or more rival political parties usually produces electoral result which does not give any winning party outright majority of votes. If feelings or ideas between parties are radically different, such situation makes coalition of parties difficult and could plunge a government into stalemate as well as the nation into instability. In late March 2006 Ukraine's parliamentary election, preliminary results report that Yanukovych's party received 33.3 % votes, Yulia Tymoshenko's party received 22.7% and both parties' bitter rival Yushchenko's party received 13.53% votes. However, Yulia Tymoshenko demanded that if coalition is to take place, she must be made the Prime Minister, or else no deal. In such cases, it is possible for members of multi-party system to black mail the nation or the voters to acquire the power of rule.         

25) Modern Western democracy at times could be prone to election of a less than perfect candidate, probably because the election tends to be a popularity contest rather than on the strong emphasis of intelligence, moral, or philosophical qualities. It boils down to a couple of candidates with unknown quantities and unpredictable potentials elected by a unrecognizable faceless public. The nation can never be sure what she might end up with. It is a gamble of people's livelihood and fate of nationhood, extending to fate of other nations. And yet with only a meager minority 20% population giving their franchise (see above item #15 and #16) to the elected candidate, the entire nation is made responsible for the choice, as such choice would be untruly labeled with the name "Universal Suffrage" and "One man one vote".  But above all, if and when eventually the elected leader should turn out to be disastrous for the nation, then nobody is to be blamed or can feel responsible for, because the choice is made by an apparent sea of faceless and unidentifiable public. Such a circumstance also provides the elected leader the freedom for unrestrained desire to do whatever he wants, because his authority comes from a mass of a faceless public that cannot be clearly identified. The word "People" will always be used to take the rap. This can bring disastrous consequence to the people and the rest of world.  (Note: However, this imperfect possibility can be greatly minimized and improved.  See proposal for a new system in Hong Kong later in this page. )        

26) Judging from the above analysis, it is possible for a ambitious politician to seize the power of the most war equipped nation on earth with relative ease. Once any such glory or victory loving person puts his hands on the control button of the nation and all those military powers, he would not be able to resist the desire of pushing that button. Once the war button is pushed, there could be no end to it until the desire of victory is satisfied by his own government or by succeeding government.  Should any wars or verbal threats occur under any form of pretext or excuse, they would quickly cause many opposition nations to start arms race, and lead to possibility of many forms of retaliations or coalition of wars or world wars. 

27) Now that you have read the above 26 faults, frauds and loop holes in the system, wouldn't you be tempted? Think of all the excitements, the respect, the authority, the might of military forces, the national power at hand, the international prestige and even a place in history to be had. Yet, you don't have to contribute to the building or achievement of any of those great things that have been made possible by billions of lives before you. All you need to do is to manipulate your party and get pass the voting ballots, and you can have all of those great privileges and loads more.... Therefore, the biggest fault of the Western democracy is the easy temptation to fraud and to do anything to get the power (Note: There are enough election complaints world wide under such system. See up coming list). You don't need to prove your qualities or your capacities or your contributions to become a modern emperor. Then after that, you can even put the rest of world in fear and apprehension, or to rise against your people too!) In such reality, democracy really means first splitting the nation into parts and then inserting a powerful temptation between the parts, so that in many less advanced nations the parts can fight each other or cheat each other to death, and the populace can either enjoy the fanfare or watch in dismay.  

28) Human societies are not built for constant flip flop change of leaders, or leaders of unknown quantities once every few years. Sooner or later one of them will bring you surprise and sorry. In other words, too frequent change of unknown and unpredictable leadership would sooner or later land the entire human race in trouble and leave decades of mess for the nation and other leaders to clean up. Governments are elected to fulfill the trust and aspirations of its citizens. These aspirations are invariably peace and stability to live and work, and to bring up children in a peaceful, comfortable, predictable and protected environments. As it happens nowadays, the fate of nation and the people is no longer in the hands of people, but in the hands of party leadership, and the individual citizens in democratic country are not truly in control... Great human civilization needs un-waving and sustained leadership with people's trust and confidence over a prolonged period, often requiring decades under one mature and responsible leadership. 

 

Flip Flop change of leadership is not the formula to accumulate and sustain peace and harmony within the society, which are the main requirements for the building of a positive and time honored great civilization. Because the greater it is, the more time, stability, mature leadership, good will and trust are needed... A 4 or 8 years term of office may, at best, establish some hope among people, but not proven reputation of leadership with required trust or faith. Because by then some Western democracy would have already forced another flip flop change of government and start an unknown leadership all over again..... In short, if you change a leader with unknown quantity every few years under popular votes by a faceless public, sooner or later you will get one who will start a war for you, and so leaving the rest of nation decades of animosities and mess to clean up.  

29) The term "Universal Suffrage" or "Universal Franchise" to elect a national leader or a government sounds wonderful. However, in view of the many faults and limitations as listed above, the net results are not true representation of democracy. It appears that the entire populace is mobilized to perform a fanfare of electing from 2 or more prearranged candidates a new person to take the decisions and fate of the nation, but subjected to so many inadequacies, limitations and faults in the basic principles, which render the whole affair completely open to misrepresentation and plausible mistakes.  Just as great principles, such as "All men are created Equal", "For the people", "By the people" and "Of the people" were claimed, yet unavailable to certain under privileged sector of society. Thus under the glorification of democracy lies the truth of party manipulations and the untruth of equality. All faults and corruptions ensue from private interests, control and power of large political parties, while persons of true ability and quality leadership cannot surface for national service. ...         

[The above list does not include the big problems and small faults during the vote casting and during the execution or mode election used by different countries, states, cities, towns and voting stations, such as cheating, bribing, the voting machines, the types of ballot boxes, the electronic computers or computer soft-wares, the methods of counting and calculation, the regulations and irregularities of voting conditions, the discarding of unclear votes, honesty and qualities of responsible officials, controllers and related personnel, the methods of announcements, etc., etc.... If such problems are included, the list of possible controversies would increase indefinitely... And so far, no voting systems provides adequate official receipt with records or proof of vote for subsequent verification or reconfirmation, if needed.

 

Modern democracy is the direct product of evolution from nations that have had histories of ancient republican state, colonies and slavery. Such nations have brought colonial immigrants and slaves into their midst, which slowly demanded rights and forced the achievement of social equality. Such nations are used to the system as a slowly development of history. Unfortunately, there are nations that have none of the past evolutionary experience, and nations that are not yet well developed or as rich to share, as well as nations that are built on or depend on purely their own traditions and belief, crystallized over millenniums of regional cultures in order to achieve peace and harmony, once such democracies with polarizing political parties (Plus temptation of power) are introduced or forced upon these traditional lands, it means perpetual unrest, violence and bloodshed, often with no foreseeable end.  It would be a long time yet, or never, before they are used to the power struggle of parties once every few short years. I have therefore made a list in the following to demonstrate that almost every month some nations on earth are tangled in election unrests directly caused by the misdirected charm of democracy. ]     

30) The above 29 points only touch some of the problems in democracy and their associated complexities. These points are only related to potentials and consequences mainly within the nation. There are lots more complex and much more serious consequences relating to international matters. But here, I would point out only one more problem that may lead to permanent sorrows and regrets sometime during this 21st century. 

When a nation is run and polarized by political parties, national interests will turn to rivaling politics. In time, politics will become national preoccupation and center of attention, and people's real needs would, wholly or partially, lose focus. If the nation uses privatized defense industries, such huge private interests will use politics or politicians to strive and compete with people's real needs and therefore siphon off national budget for their own interests. The more such industries grow, the more they will need to survive, and grow further. 

Meanwhile, such vicious cycle escalates global arms race, nowadays nuclear arm race. Because national survival is always more urgent than observance of treaties. Unfair pressure in prevention of nuclear arms race will only create underground arms race, or complete collapse of treaties. Growth of privatized defense industries need excuse for wars. If there are no wars, they would have to create and invent wars (Sometimes the most war equipped nations are the most fearful of being attacked.  Either it is because more arms create only more fears or it is just excuse for more arms and wars).  

Any wars could spur off more wants to make nuclear bombs. And the smallest excuse will give chance to escalate more defense budget, and siphon off more national resources from needy people. Then, this will force the promotion of absolute press freedom, and of course, word wars or picture wars (now movie wars), or different forms of ideological or intelligence wars will be invented to divert attentions from internal social injustices and past wrongs. Al these things create tensions and inflame violent sentiments internationally, which would escalate and finish up in threats at both ends. Threats will energize more defense budget and siphon off more of people's real needs. Wars of words will grow anyway, and very soon medias of all sorts under support of politics will grow out of proportions world wide, which would be used as a weapon of attack or defense, or as tools of disguised propaganda, thus fanning up even more tensions, also in vicious cycles, sometimes accurately labeled as "Cold Wars"... 

 

Eventually there will be nothing else in the world, except party politics, more politics, political tensions, private arms maker's unannounced promotion of politics, press freedom, wars of words or pictures, talking big and acting tiny, Cold Wars, complaints, condemnation of human rights, threats, calling names, pointing fingers, more home land defense and more defense budgets, arms race, disguised prevention of arms, under ground arms race, more words, more propaganda machines, more demand for press freedom, more excuse for wars, small wars, then more wars, more defense, more politics, more word wars, more budgets..... and finally a big show down or big blow up... of course, in the end, the nuclear blow-up! 

(Note: What would happen if someone call you names, or ridicule you with not so cool jokes and turn your nerves boiling? I bet you would want to punch him in his nose! When a nation wants to start wars on his neighbours, it would first start its propaganda machines cranking and working over time... Cold Wars are made of nasty and frosty words, which then turn into hot bloody wars...  It is always those cleverly presented but uncool bad-mouthings that precede the use bullets and bombs. Such bad mouthing is always called "Freedom of Speech" or "Freedom of Press"! It is sometimes packed with more explosives than the bullets and bombs...     

The world will never know peace when global fate, national fate and people's fate are in the hands of politicians, political parties, private arms makers and offensive or disguised Freedom of Press.  The blames for of responsibilities would always be borne by the faceless voting public, or just simply "People", and charged to the name of Democracy under Universal Suffrage ). While the arms makers and war making propaganda machines grow to astronomical size, and political medias, the voice created by the system, grow all over the world. The peace loving people can only watch and hear. They have nothing to do with national decisions or the fate of nations, except the obligation to vote, to take the blames, to pay tax and to go to wars to kill or to be killed for the politicians, the political parties, for the power of huge propaganda machines and for the arms makers and of course for the prized word "Democracy". 

 

Recently, a new Empire is rising fast globally to take over the minds and hearts of next generation mankind. It's the rising empire of entertainment medias. Of course, who doesn't love to be entertained? But watch it! That love is being used to teach and cultivate, day and night, slowly but surely how to watch and enjoy the killings and murder in numerous varieties, to laugh off wars and political atrocities and replace them with heroism and glory of death, or to laugh away any would be disastrous results of national policies or political and military undertakings, to glorify and promote loyalty, patriotism and nationalism, to blind the true vision of love for all living things on earth. More and more entertainers are turning into fate making national leaders... At this rate, all it would need is another 20 years! Then world wide efforts will focus on mutual excitation of political wars and developing suitable weapons. Someday aircraft carriers will be turned into huge coffins, foreign military bases will become mass burial grounds, and no one knows when, where and whose entire family would be obliterated. And no one can prove who done it. There will be suit-case little cute nuclear bombs, instead of waist strapped little dynamites. So, the next world war is not going to be pretty and small! And when it happens, who would get the blunt end of it? Perhaps those who like it and start it, wouldn't get any of it ?... 

 

Yes, it's getting there alright! It might as well be for some people, because life for the under-dogs is no life at all, and life under barbed wires, under the terrorization and intimidation of soldiers, or wrong kind of politicians, or police, or prison guards are not worth living and are by far more dangerous than individual terrorists. There are enough common or ordinary people turned into suicidal bombers these days. Or haven't you noticed? You see what they do, but have you ever asked why?

 

In short, democracy engineered by competing and polarizing parties, under warped election of popularity contest, energized by private arms makers, teamed by political religions and religious politics, fueled by propaganda industries, charged to the responsibility of the faceless electoral public under the universal suffrage slogan, resulting in rapid change of flip-flop leadership... all of them are growing in strength in recent years again! They have started a momentum, which will sooner or later land the country, the people and the human race into slowly approaching nuclear confrontation when all sorts of nasty names, slogans and excuses for hot bloody wars and cold media wars, would become natural orders of the day, again!.... Does this remind us of the past? Is this the inevitable future of mankind? Or am I wrong?

 

[Note:- Recent event in some elections does show that even such "Two men" or "two party" system can come up with some remedial or corrective measures, provided there is a Mid Term general election, and provided that the situation has become far obviously bad, otherwise nothing will be done. And yet, this is also a crucial time to test the principle of democracy. For if democracy is believed, then people's voice (through votes) will be respected, and actions will follow. If however politicians carry on their own ways, no matter what the reasons may be, the democracy is something else... Besides, if once a system can cause one unhappy experience, then it can happen again and again. And the next time it might not be so obvious... Therefore it's the system, and not men who run it that are responsible for... Added Dec 2006]

Brushing aside the alarming flaws of modern Western democracy, let's also take a quick glance at its ancient roots. Judging from the scanty records and timing of history, the invasion of Christianity coupled with long centuries of political division under democracy in the period of Roman Republic (509 BC to 27 BC) appears to be the root cause leading eventually to the chaos and anarchy that began in the 1st century and exploded in the 3rd century Roman Empire. It was emperor Diocletian who attempted to pull together the chaotic anarchy by trying to eliminate the invading Christianity, but he made it worst and was forced to quit. This left successor Emperor Constantine the choice to reverse the course and give in to Christianity instead. He then ruled with the cruelest and most absolute measures to re-enforce his decisions, including killing his own family. So, in retrospection, Roman Empire (after 27 BC) was disintegrated by the residual splitting forces of previous democracy and glued together by new absolute forces of monocracy and monotheism. Therefore, history recycles between integration and disintegration.  

( Note:- For that reason and in those times Jesus was propagandized and hailed as the "Savior". Although monocratic and monotheistic rule temporarily appeared to have reunited the Roman Empire, they did not "save" it, because the Roman Empire fell into more chaos and corruption, and was plundered to its final demise only a short century after Constantine's death. In fact, from the historical point of view, since Roman imperial rule depended virtually entirely on the claim of support from Gods, the very moment those Gods were under invasion and fell into confusion, the Empire was already doomed for total anarchy. Further more, although the acclaimed "Savior" did not save Roman Empire, Christianity did press on to put the whole European civilization under prolonged darkness for more than 1500 years. Human History would always remember those darkened days, which preceded centuries of consequential bloodshed, the slavery, colonial expansion and wars between man to man until world wars and nuclear war. One wonders if the 21st century and the threat of nuclear annihilation could finally put an end to such historic momentum and lift the human wisdom to a finally civilized platform? And politicians would practice what they preach, such as human rights or respect between nations, cultures and traditions! ... Or else how would this world end up? Perhaps it's not too late yet! Perhaps that's why people are killing themselves for peace or for hatred everyday and everywhere. And yet nobody is asking what is the true reason that makes any human willing to end his own life  ).  

These days, the so called Democracies bring along nothing but internal struggles between political parties, especially in less developed nations, and international wars, including the 2nd World War. There are two vital defects that are typical of Western democracy.  Firstly, Western democracy is not a true democratic system, but a make-belief under an alluring title. See above list of 30 defects in the system. Secondly, the fundamental nature of democracy under multi-party rivalry contains energy of fragmentation and dispute or obsessive competition. Obsessive political ambitions coupled with party rivalry often lead to fanatical zeal or excess of patriotism, which then fuel the flame of external expansion and wars. If the national defense industries are privatized, such enormous capacity of the private interests added by nationalism or political maneuvers must lead to unnecessary external expansion and wars, and wars always inflame more emotional patriotism creating a vicious cycle. Wars also involve allied forces unnecessarily and spread the seeds of  hatred and revenge worldwide. Wars also bring unpredictable short and long term consequences to everybody. Therefore, such democratic system could pose as a threat to world peace. If not controlled, it could become a cause of war in this age of nuclear weapons. But control must begin with the control of political systems and politicians. It's always the politicians who make decisions or designs to push the button, bombs can't...    

On the other hand, it is quite understandable that internal political stability will lead to international peace and prosperity both politically and economically. Hence the necessary caution and the proposal of an improved new system. Such system is aimed at controlling the mutual excitations, both good and bad. between political parties, and spread out political energies and responsibilities to a new and much wider field of representation, which perhaps may be called Democracy by Universal Representation (see proposal towards end of this page)... However, I must also hurry to add that despite the above 30 defects in Western democracy, there are also some good stuff and merits in it. It's alluring title gives people the false impression that they are living in a state that is run and controlled by them. Such false impression also can produce formidable public actions that from time to time rise to correct social ills or national policies, although only to a limited extent. But when it comes to wars or international confrontations, the politicians can never fail to have their ways by drumming up patriotism and national loyalty. Patriotic rhetoric and big or glorious principles are the most efficient tools to evoke mob emotions. In the end, it is still the forces of political party and politicians who run the show. As to the matter regarding democratic choice of national leader by election, it boils down to the truth that political parties allow voters to choose from "next to nothing" (2 choices mean next to no choice!). It should also be pointed out that all politicians are in favor of such democracy, because they are the lucky players. A bi-party democracy means it's always the minority that rules the majority (Multi-party system is even worst) and to have all the fun and the dollars that comes with it. If you have the chance to be a player, wouldn't you love it? Or wouldn't you protect it? So, they are not likely to let go of it.  It might go on for ever, because the voice, the power, the facilities, the resources... in fact, the whole country's life or death is in the player's  hands! You are barely one grain of sand in a beach, or one drop in the vast ocean of faceless public.... So, if democracy is universally accepted and praised as a good thing, then why not make it real? So why not maximize democratic representation and minimize party control? 

I am not proposing the encouragement of monocratic or autocratic rulership here, nor do I propose the return to old Chinese method of raising public servants by examinations, but I do think that it's time to begin designing an improvement or an intermediate system for the space age human society, because as civilization advances and human society becomes complex, anything that comes down from ancient time must be improved and kept up with modern needs. We are now in the age of mass destruction, which has become a major turning point of civilization, quite unique in history, it is time to advance our political system commensurate with our age and the dangers of out time. But it needs to go ahead with great caution step by step, therefore, to base on democracy and improve upon it is a cautious and appropriate step. I would have tried to include a list of advantages for the Western democratic system here, but since the whole nation is geared up to elect one out of mere two men or parties (or even a couple more) persons presented by political parties already strongly betrays the principle values of democracy, also in view of the defects in the system as listed above, which by far overwhelm any good points except the illusion that people, though only minority, do, in fact, participate in casting the votes to rubber stamp false system and give mandate to the undemocratic outcome, I find it academically pointless to emphasize such massive make belief as a positive act or motivation.   

I now add in the following some examples of problems or faults in democratic elections under similar systems of Western style democracy, which has turned many countries either into riots or some form of instability, even violent bloodshed. These examples happened only within the short span of time in the last couple of years, showing Western democracy is actually the cause of regional instability. This can be largely avoided by adopting the new measures under development in Hong Kong (see suggestions towards end of this page). This list is incomplete, only a small numbers of incidents are chosen for listing here. 

 

Examples of troubled democracy in recent time:-

(1) 2003, Charles McArthur Ghankay Taylor was democratically elected president of Liberia in July of 1997, garnering over 75 percent of the vote in an election that international observers deemed fair. But eventually he was forced to step down and go into exile for alleged crimes. It shows democratic mandate can be over turned by foreign and domestic pressures, thus becomes meaningless. 

(2) 2004, Haiti's President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was the democratically elected in 1900, months later he was ousted by military coup and was exiled to the US, then reinstated in 1994. In year 2000 he was democratically elected again, but again forced into exile before his term expires in 2006. Here again the democratically obtained mandate had not been strictly respected and exercised. 

(3) 2005, Ukraine's democratic election elected Viktor Yanukovych as Prime Minister, but the result was over turned and re-election was necessary. Opposition leader Viktor Yushchenko then won the re-election. The complaint was organized or party cheating. 

(4) 2005, In the Philippines, people repeatedly demonstrated in street, trying to impeach their President for election frauds. Her husband decided to go into temporary exile because of his own part in the corruption claim, but the President refused to give in and hang on. Such democracy does not give stable government and peaceful national life. Indeed, the situation evolved. Already since May 2005 there has been a legal impeachment against this lady President for her acts of bribery, and graft and corruption and betrayal of public trust.  The unrest went on for months, with street demonstration going on. Then suddenly on 24 Feb 2006 the Philippino President declared national emergency and enacted Marshal law. With which she imprisoned marine leaders, military and police officers, a professor, 16 opposition figures including a left-wing legislator... 

 

Still, large demonstrations went on in the streets calling her to step down, but they were driven off by police batons ... The instability continues on, and the situation is not likely to resolve soon... Looking from afar, what one can see is some democracy at work, where people elect and give one person the power to rule the nation, and the person then return to people with police and soldiers' batons... It's so easy to forget that the people is in fact the nation... When a national emergency becomes people's grievance against you and people give you the power, how then can you use the power against people, or drive off their grievances with police batons? But this is democracy! As soon as a leader is elected, he or she can invoke the power to go against the people, or against some neighboring countries with wars. All that's needed is an excuse, good or bad excuse doesn't matter... . In June 2006, the street demonstration demanding the President to step down is still going on, but the President remained unperturbed, with the protection of her own party it would be mostly unlikely to get 2/3 majority to impeach her. This democracy has been in disarray since the day of election.     

(5) On 18th Sept 2005, German multi-party federal election ended in a deadlock, when the two major parties could not reach the electoral majority. Eventually after a month of negotiation parties SPD and CDU decided to form a coalition to rule. German political instability affects the economic stability of the entire European Union. Note: Germany has 4 political parties SPD, CDU, CSU and FDP, as a result, a winning party easily fails to obtain majority votes. A two party coalition government is not an ideal government because of two different party politics. That's why a multi-party system will eventually evolve to become a bi-party system, but neither 2 candidates, nor 4 candidates, can represent true democracy. 

(6) Nov 2005 Azerbaijan's election, Human Rights Watch said that it would be impossible to hold a free and fair parliamentary election in Azerbaijan due to violence and intimidation of the opposition. European Union and other world medias also said Azerbaijan Elections failed to meet election standards, but no re-election was called. Such situation produces mistrust, disputes and instability after election. 

(7) Dec 2005. Canada held federal election only in June 2004. Now Canada is forced to hold a federal election again on 23 January 2006, after its minority Liberal government lost a vote of confidence in parliament. The crisis was triggered by the party's involvement in a corruption scandal in the province of Quebec. 

(8) On 11th Dec 2005 Chile national election between three candidates Michelle Bacehelet, Sebastian Pinera and Joaguim Lavin failed to produce majority (over 50%). The election must be repeated in Jan 2006 by reducing the candidacy to two contestants only. Yet, either 2 or 3 candidates prearranged by respective political parties for universal suffrage betrays the ideal of true democracy. As it is, no one can truly predict or ascertain the incoming national policy under the pressure of party policy or party members following the sudden change of party rule. Thus, national fate is subject to change once again!  A change could be good or bad, nevertheless it is a gamble. A national fate shouldn't be a gamble in the design of its power structure. If a government is no good, people can and always do revolt any way. 

(9) The newly inserted Western democracy in Iraq could be an interesting spectacle to observe. Since now all efforts, including war efforts, are said to be given to building Western democracy in Iraq and in the Islamic world, but the true result is building conflicts and civil wars in Iraq. If it should go beyond control, then someone would have to be responsible and answerable to history. It's only the beginning and hardly the end of story yet. So keep eyes and ears open!

(10) On Jan 23 2006, Canada re-election completed. Conservative party won with 36.1% of votes. However, this gives only a minority government. A coalition with another party is needed.

(11) At end of Jan 2006, Palestinians went to poll, Hamas Party won with over whelming majority and took 75 out of a total of 132 electoral seats. Now the question remains, as it depends on friends and foes around the world who advocate democracy will recognize the result as legitimate choice of the Palestinian people and give them the appropriate rights and supports... Unfortunately now many of the pro-democracy camps are exerting all sorts of pressures to force the change of Hamas' policies, for which the Palestinians people have elected them. Presently Hamas is facing dismal financial crisis. The world is in apprehension of what could yet happen in that unfortunate and stressful part of the world. .    

(12) On Feb 27th 2006 Taiwan President Cheng Sui Bin suddenly dismantled the Unification Council established by the previous government that represented intents for peaceful unification between Taiwan and China. Cheng's action took place amidst his repeated indications to push for the independence of Taiwan, thus creating the possibility of war between the two sides, despite the objections and criticisms of many Taiwanese people, including the opposition party leader Ma Ying Jiu as well as the recent mediation for peace by the United States government. As soon as his signed the cancellation of the Reunification Council, his popularity rating dropped to just over 20%. Cheng's act is not an official declaration of war, but that would depend entirely on the matured and tolerant interpretation of his counter part. Many wars have been started with much less provocations... The question now surfaces. Is this what's called democracy? Is this indeed people's rule? Regardless of the historical backgrounds and whatever desires or ambitions Cheng may personally have. Has he the right and the mandate to bring his people towards possible bloodshed, or just the intent to create sentiments of war, or just to emphasize his personal policy for independence, or even just the removal of an established instrument of peace, especially against an opponent that is so much more powerful? If he has, then there is something badly wrong and awfully dangerous about the system of democracy in Taiwan. People should quickly rectify those basic faults of democracy, which is what Hong Kong people are trying to do!  

13) On 20th March 2006, Belarus election, official results showed Alexander Lukashenko won with 82.6% votes and opposition Alexander Milinkovich received 6% vote. Lukashenko has already ruled since 1994. The result means for every 13.8 people that voted for the winner, there is only one voted for the loser. The difference in ratio is too obvious to notice. The public reaction in the coming months will tell if the result is true or not. These elections were overseen by monitors from the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and the Council of Europe. The US refused to accept the results and suggested re-election. Some European countries criticized the results and the Russians said there was nothing wrong with the election. So, as usual such examples illustrate that democracy is none but what's in the eyes of the beholder.. 

14) On 26th March 2006, Ukraine's parliamentary election, preliminary results report that Yanukovych's party received 33.3% votes, Yulia Tymoshenko's party received 22.7% and President Yushchenko's party only 13.53%. Yushchenoko has barely been swept to power under the Orange Revolution and ousted bitter rival Yanukovych by invalidating a previous election about one and half year ago.  Now Yushchenko suffers the reversal of such humiliating down fall. Anyhow, as Yuskchenko could never form coalition with Yanukovych,  presently Yulia Tymoshenko is demanding that if her party is to join Yanukovych, she must be made the Prime Minister, or else no deal. Thus her demand amounts to black mailing the voters or the nation to gain power. But that's nothing new. And at this moment of writing, the national situation is still in limbo...   

15) April 4th 2006, Thailand's Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra resigned, after weekly large street demonstrations since January against him for corruption and abuse of power because he had sold his family own assets in the Shin Corp, a telecom firm, for 1.9 billion US$ to a foreign Co., from Singapore, free of Tax. However, Thaksin said he would keep his seat in Parliament and remain in control as Head of his RAK party. His opponents said Thaksin will wield his influence behind the government as usual because in effect he has not quitted at all. So, the fight is still on. Democracy in too many countries have long become the excuse and stepping stone for the rich and powerful or the party bosses to seize political power. And in order to do so too many politicians resort to deceitful means to get it... After a whole year of social unrest eventually the military staged a coup and ousted Shinawatra. Now bombs are frequent occurrence in that country. Some say it's the ousted Primier which is behind the bombs...  

16) 12th Apr 2006, Italian national election results announced that Mr. Prodi won by about 25000 vote (ca 0.01%) more than present Prime Minister Berlusconi. April 18th, disputed votes were already clarified and confirmed by court authorities. PM Berlusconi still refuse to conceit defeat. He demanded to govern in a grand coalition with the winning party. But winner Mr. Prodi refused. Then Berlusconi threatened to make it impossible for the winning party to govern because of the small winning margin. On Apr 17th the Pope called for unity for the sake of nation. 18th April, the situation is still in stalemate as Berlusconi still wanted to share power and refused to conceit. In mid May at last Mr Prodi was at last sworn in as PM. However, the problem to govern the nation has just begun with such a small margin and in face of declared intent to disrupt by the opposition party.. 

17) During the last week of Jan 2006, election for Palestinian Legislative Council took place in Tulkarem Palestine under properly and peacefully conducted manners Voters turned up near 80%, even under occupation by Israel. Hamas won with a clear majority. There can be no doubt that Palestinians had opted for Hamas leadership and its well known policies. Voters must have also anticipated the difficulties Hamas will have to confront after election, but they still overwhelmingly chose Hamas for their government. If there was ever a clear indication of people's democratic choice of government, this must be the best example for the world to see. But the real problem has just begun. Do nations that advocate democracy, especially those that spread it around the world by invasions, respect the principles or ideal of democracy, and thus respect the choice of a nation and people? How much value would they attach to their preaching of democracy? Would they continue to call resistance to occupation "terrorists" and therefore is the representative of a whole nation "a government of terrorism"? Would they pressurize Hamas to recognize and submit to the authorities and forces of occupation on their land? What I am concerned here is what other theatricals and words of mighty glory and righteousness would the politicians ask the good people of the world to buy? I hear everyday nothing but politicians' claim to represent and speak for the people, or that they are the choice "by the people, for the people and of the people" themselves (just like Hamas)!... But this is only the beginning... Would they end up in a new invasion of Palestine, or more invasions or nuclear option threats before 2009? Who is going to clean up all the mess of invasions for decades to come? I think this Palestinian election speaks clearly for all the true values of democracy. 

(Note: The Palestinian election is a choice out of desperation after 2 generations of bloody animosity with their occupation forces. It is an expression of determination to resist foreign occupation, a task Hamas is chosen to deliver. But, it is unlikely to be respected by the foreign powers.  Elsewhere, democracy by invasion or by colluding with foreign invasion forces is a show of depreciation for the value of democracy. Meanwhile, there is also little value in the so called "democratic government" elected by less than 20% national population  Consequently, the overall value of democracy is getting cheaper by the minute.  That's why it must be changed or improved. Because, only the naive people believe in the rhetoric of some politicians these days, when world citizens are being plugged out of the streets and imprisoned for years without charge, while their wives and children at home are left without the bread earner, and also while the politicians preach others on human rights. Meanwhile, supernatural beliefs have also got to be part of the politics that could cause bloodshed and someday alter or destroy the rational human world. For all these reasons and more, which are the ticking time mechanism for a future nuclear show-down, let's propose that national leaders should not be chosen only from "big worded" orating politicians, nor by a faceless mass of emotional people, but by a large committee of pre-selected men or women of leadership quality and qualification, including those professional who are experienced and are already responsible for governing the nation under public auspices, i.e. government servants. Please see up-coming details of proposal... )

18) May and June 2006, huge street demonstration went on almost daily demanding Taiwan's President Chen Shui Bian to step down because his son in law was arrested and indicted for corruption of large scale inside trading and his wife was found to have received millions worth of departmental store gift vouchers in corruptions. Chen felt guilty enough and gave up partial political power. But the opposition party was not satisfied and people continued street demonstrations. Then 29th June 2006. Congress voted to impeach Chen, but being protected by his party members the impeachment did not reach 2/3 majority to remove him Taiwan people are therefore trapped in corrupt and unstable government, but unable to do anything about it. The drama of Taiwan continues...

Note:- The rules of impeaching a President in Western Style Democracies world wide is a completely ineffective measure. As long as the President's own Party protects him it would be impossible to get 2/3 majority in Parliament or Congress to impeach a President, and he can afford to be corrupt just as he wants. But of course his Party always protects him. Who is going to betray his own Party interest and give up power, or his own rice bowl? It boils down to the fact that such democracy means the voting public has elected a wrong leader who betrays the trust and the interests of the nation, but unable to remove or correct the mistake. The determination of an unwanted leader to hang onto power is an act of treason and dictatorship.  This is what happens in Taiwan and in the Philippines at this moment, but this is a common phenomenon in many Western Style Democracies supported by electoral laws. 

On the other hand, if  the rules for impeachment were to be changed to simple majority (above 51%), then everyday some Presidents would have to step down. This too would render the system or the country in instability. This predicament renders such Democracies both ineffective and undemocratic. And the root of problem lies in the misleading name of "Democracy" when it really represents the power struggles and interests of political parties. Voters are eagerly prompted to vote, and so are brain washed to think that mere participation of voting is democracy, when in fact they are participating and helping the struggle for power of the political Parties, thus creating national instabilities and unnecessary violence. Historical forces of make-belief have plagued human civilization for thousand of years, both in religion and in politics, that is why they are heading for an atomic explosion...  

 

[ It should be noted here that nations, which inherit the history of Republican States, or colonial past and slavery, have been forced by history to give due rights to citizens and immigrants of different ethnicities. The control of national power is strongly retained in the internal structure of political parties. Such historic developments are slow and appear natural to the people and their national life. But for nations that depend on strong historical traditions and beliefs for national unity and harmony, the introduction of political parties and democracy means inserting unaccustomed and undue struggles in the society. Because they have no gradual historical developments and are not used to party struggles, a sudden change of system could mean endless political troubles. The list here illustrates that practically every month, some comparatively traditional nations on earth are suffering from such troubles. And yet it happens so subtly that they are not even noticed.. ]

19) June 2006, East Timor democracy has been having violent turmoil for a couple of years. Many lives were lost. Australia, New Zealand and UN all have sent peace keeping troops to curb riots. Finally Prime Minister Mari Alkatiri resigned on 29 June 2006, but unrest continues. 

20) July 12th 2006. Mexican election protests:- Supporters of defeated Mexican presidential candidate Andes Manuel Lopez Obrador are amassing for a march on Mexico City, saying the narrow election (less than 0.5%) was stolen. Today tens of thousands of protestors are gathering in mountain towns and sprawling industrial cities across Mexico. They are farmers, factory workers and housewives who feel Andres Obrador was defrauded in the election. And they will converge on Sunday (16th Jul) in the capital city in what's anticipated to be the biggest demonstration in modern Mexican history... 800, 000 are expected... So once again election frauds are claimed and plunge the nation into disputes and instability... Such built in conflicts and unrests have become a common occurrence in majority Western style democracy across the world, and it could occur once every few short years. In some less stable countries or in times of international conflicts, it typically and easily lead to bloodshed. It's about time that some basic improvements are introduced... 

21) Sept 6th 2006. At this moment of writing, at least 4 nations of democracy are engaged in national struggle for power.  

a) Philippines:- 2004 Arroyo won a 6-year term but was accused of vote-rigging... 2005, : Key members of Arroyo's Cabinet quit over vote-rigging allegations, but she survives impeachment with support of her party. Feb, 24, 2006 Arroyo declares state of emergency to quash opposition. Aug, 24, 2006: Second impeachment effort fails to remove her... 

b) Congo Election:- On July 17, 2006, armed men shot into a crowd at an election campaign rally in Rugarama, killing four people and wounding 13.  Mutokambali, who stood as an independent candidate, fled to Uganda in fear for his life. These are not the only killings....  Sunday, July 30, 2006, U.N. said that 11 polling stations were burned down by people opposed to the vote. Reports from 10 polling stations in Mbuji-Mayi late Sunday indicated turnout was between 5 percent and 15 percent. In the nearby village of Leamiela, only 30 of 565 registered voters had cast ballots. This Presidential election, a contest between Prsident Joseph Kibila and former rebel chief Jean-Pierre Bemba, ended in non-conclusive run-off and is scheduled to do it again in late Oct. Presently 17000 UN troops are keeping peace and over seeing the election. More troops are planning to arrive from Europe... So this is only the beginning of instability ahead.

c) Mexican election:-  Mainly a context between proclaimed winner Felipe Calderón and left-leaning candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador occurred on July 2nd 2006.  The winning margin is less than 1%. Angry voters, including millions of Mexico's poor, farmers and working-class laborers, believe President Fox and this party PAN committed multiple acts of fraud to steal the election for their candidate, Felipe Calderón. Fox and the PAN effectively control Mexico's federal electoral institute (IFE), the government agency that oversees elections, and the country's federal electoral tribunal. That panel of seven magistrates has the final authority to validate - or not - the outcome of elections.  However, IFE's own partial recount of a portion of the July 2 vote revealed numerous irregularities in the handling and counting of ballots at various polling stations. Then on Sept 6th the Electoral Tribunal announced Felipe Calderón to be winner, and Obrador threatened to create a separate government for Mexico. It appears that Mexico is in for years of instability. 

d) Taiwan Impeachment: People of Taiwan attempted to impeach President Chen Shui Bian in July 2006 because of his family corruption. The impeachment again could not overcome the barrier of 2/3 Congressional votes, due to support of his party. Now some one million people of Taiwan are donating funds to support daily protest and sit-in at the Presidential Palace, vowing to continue indefinitely until Chen step down. It looks like Chen is determined to hang on despite all the protests, and turmoil in Taiwan .. ..  

22) 9th Sept 2006 Taiwan:- Amidst the commotion and urgency of  impeachment and massive daily demands of President Chen's resignation, and barely a couple of days before the declared massive (planned to assemble 300,000 strong) sit-in protest at the Presidential Palace, President Chen suddenly stepped up his determination of defiance by using for the first time a Presidential plane and took off for a quick official foreign visit, apparently to seek urgent support and advice from international allies that cannot be done in Taiwan in the heat massive demonstration against him. His sudden and unexpected departure showed that something ominous is in the making, because no proud and self-conscious President would show his face in international stage, just at the very height when he is shamed and his reputation is being thrashed into the dust-bin by his own people (note:- His son-in-law Chao Chien-Ming has been arrested and is currently under indictment of conducting corrupt inside-trading. Apparently he had bought stocks in the Taiwan Development Corp. after being tipped by a senior company official at a dinner party that it was about to receive a $300 million loan. On June 1st, Chen's office announced the resignation of Ma Yung-cheng, a deputy secretary general of the presidential staff who faced allegations that he was involved with the same insider stock deal.  Another top presidential aide, Chen Che-Nan (or Chen Tse-nian), was arrested recently in connection with financial irregularities in the construction of a high-speed railway between major Taiwanese cities after he was photographed gambling at a South Korean casino. 

Note: "The brokerage firm Huapan Co., which was in charge of obtaining Thai workers for the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corp (KRTC) received more than US$50,000 in illegal broker's fee from brokerage companies in Thailand and Chen Che-Nan was accused of involvement.... Prosecutors said that in November 2002, Chen Che-nan slippd out of Taiwan over week end and went to South Korea's Cheju Island to gamble in a casino with former KRTC vice chairman Chen Min-hsien, who paid for his trip. Meanwhile, Kaohsiung prosecutors said Chen Che-nan was also treated to three other foreign trips by the laborer brokerage firm.. President Chen Shui-bian offered an apology on 29th Oct 2005 over the Kaohsiung Rapid Transit Corp (KRTC) corruption scandal involving the deputy secretary general Chen Che-nan of his presidential office, and said "I feel sorry and ashamed about Chen Che-nan's integrity problem. On behalf of the government, the DPP and myself, I will assume the biggest responsibility and apologize to the nation... ", later he added "If I am found to be involved in this case, or any other corruption then I will step down....", and now, this Taiwan President has said (on Sept 20th 2006) "Just as long as I can continue the Presidential office, anything else is negotiable!... ". It's no wonder now hundreds of thousands of people are demanding his resignation. But since anything also means everything, I think he was indicating that will give up his stance on Taiwan's independence for exchange.  . 

In other developments, The President's wife has been found to have received millions in departmental store gift vouchers. Chen himself has been accused of miss using the state's secret funds that enable him to maintain foreign diplomatic relationships.) 

Note: In early June  President Chen Shui-bian has already ceded some powers to try and deflect a political crisis caused by a corruption scandal implicating a family member. He said he was handing control of the cabinet to the prime minister and would take no part in political campaigning. This series of events, announcements and measures seem to indicate he is not feeling entirely innocent or blameless. It would obviously add oil to the fire.... 

 

23) Saturday, 9th Sept 2006, Taiwan:- Some 300,000 people did stage sit-in protest at the Taipei Presidential palace, vowing that they would continue the sit-in indefinitely until Chen resigns. Chen retreated to his home town Tainan where people also shouted for his resignation. But Chen doggedly declared that he would stay put until his term ends in 20 months. He said because people have already elected him. So, instead of leaving Taiwan society in a peaceful state, he prefers to stick around in defiance, and make sure that Taiwan plunges into more violent turmoil in the next 20 months... Demonstrators carried the 4 words of traditional "Social Bonds" on their march.

Note:- The philosophical principles of  "4 Bonds" consist of , namely:- Firstly "Propriety", which includes proper manner of conduct, mutual respect and social courtesies. The old Chinese society carried out this tradition to great extremes. Secondly, "Righteousness", which includes all forms of social and legal justices. Thirdly, "Honesty", which includes incorrupt social interactions and clean governmental performance. Fourthly, "Sense of Shame", which means people should up keep their honour and integrity, as well as be able to feel the sense of shame when they do wrong. These 4 basic principles were so strongly believed and observed in traditional Chinese society that they worked effectively in lieu of religious influence and legal laws. Today they are still taught in schools. For many Chinese people these are still part of the belief that bonds the Chinese society. Recently, I have heard Chinese Premier Wen Gia-Bao speaking in TV to this effect:- "Chinese people must strive to earn respect from the people of the world, but to achieve that we must not just use words, we must show it in our deeds... We must also build up our economy... and observe moral conducts.... ".  I think it takes a lot of courage and commitment for a politician to speak those words. I have not heard of any other world politicians or religious leaders making reference to "moral conduct" for a long time. This is what I mean by "flip flop" change of leadership once every few short years.  It would be a pity to limit the term of office, say a 4 or 8 years maximum, for a positive and respected leader... In fact, from the 7th century to early 20th century China exercised true democracy by raising every governing officials through written exams. In such exams each candidate would be required to air his views on governance, thus asserting his written commitment of conduct in his future responsibilities... Unfortunately, there are still enough barbaric political leaders in our midst who talk of glorious principles and human rights, but think of nothing but cannibalism.     

This man Chen has been brought up with proper Chinese education and ancestral belief for which people had elected him to lead, but now he openly betrays them all. It appears he is heading for betrayal of all the national values he has inherited.... 10th Sept 2006, again over 200,000 well behaved people sat in all day in front of the palace to protest in persistent rains. Many citizens donated foods, drinks and other necessities to help the protest... Such massive scale of objection to corruption has never been seen in the East, but democracy provides the opportunity for corruption to hang on to power, and renders its aspirations hopelessly useless.

 

24) Taiwan, Friday evening 15th, Oct 2006:-  People arrived from other towns and villages to Taipei to assemble a colossal rally against President Chen. They formed a slow moving but peaceful and orderly sea of people, encircling the Presidential Palace and residence demanding Chen's resignation. This seemingly endless human mass was claimed by organizers to be some 750,000 strong (police said it was 360,000. There are also those who arrived by cars and those demonstrated from their up-stair homes and windows, not counted) all shouted thunderously and deafeningly "step-down, step-down" in unison. Earlier the brother of Taiwan's Vice President also demanded Chen's resignation. The man who initiated the massive movement was once the chairman of Chen's own political party. Any normal person, let alone a leader, would have been humbled and belittled, and would step down, if not for mass demand, at least for the peace of the land.  But Chen Shui Bian said publicly "This is only a usual phenomenon of democracy. We are very tolerant towards it...". (What an unperturbed politician! But perhaps he is right, corruptions, earth shattering demonstrations and thunderous demand for resignation are merely usual phenomena in some democracies. His comment about democracy seems to confirm everything that is written about democracy in these lines. His words seem also to convey that in this great man's mind he is only being lenient or tolerant for not taking strong action against the people calling for his resignation). 

 

So, what now? This standoff indicates that greater turmoil and unrest are yet to befall on the Taiwan island. I wonder does democracy mean the will of one man, or his party, or that of the marching masses? Already on the one hand the people are planning for massive industrial strikes across the whole of Taiwan, and on the other hand, unless Chen is willing to step down quickly, or else he must step up his hold on power by side stepping into other political issues with probably external allies to divert attention from the corruption charges. Something very ominous is in the making, which is not likely to end soon . So democracy, in this present example, shows what it can do "for the people" and "by the people", or for its land... However, I have no doubt though that the real characteristics and strength of the Chinese culture will always overcome... I would never have discussed the Taiwan (her language is my mother tongue) or past KMT issues on WWW, if it wasn't for showing the defects and misgivings of democracy and the proposal for improvements. In order to illustrate the pros and cons of democracy and to reach the goal of improvements, impartial references to historic events and present developments are absolutely indispensable...   

 

25) 16th Sept 2006, Saturday, Taiwan and Mexico:- In Taipei, a mass rally, claimed to be 80,000 strong for support of President Chen took place and organized by his Party, although the reasons behind weeks of massive turmoil in Taiwan were due to charges against corruptions of his family and his close political inner circle. It does seem untimely and strange to support the charge of corruption, no matter what Chen's other politics are or represent.  In Mexico City, on this day hundreds of thousands of people, completely filled the huge city square, came out to support Obrador, the officially defeated candidate of Presidential election, who claims the election was a fraud. It is said that they might set up an opposition or parallel government. Indeed the frauds in election are a common phenomenon and can seriously cripple national trust.  The above incidences also show democracies everywhere are causing massive unrest and prolonged national instability. The ultimate question is why can't the ideal of democracy, or "People's Rule", be realized and carried out by people's own will or by their agreed representations, instead of those controlling, fighting and trouble making political parties that often cause such crippling unrest in the nation? It's no wonder why UN must often oversee the elections, and even send troops to put down unrest. 

Note:- The fact indicates that there are dangerous fundamental flaws in democracy, yet the drumming up of propaganda for democracy by politicians and medias are so deafening that over shadows all thoughts for improvements or a complete overhaul of the system. As it is, most people are unaware that democracy is in fact totally controlled by political parties. If people are given only a couple of candidates to vote for rule of the land, then it's already far removed from democracy. In which case, it would be by far better to delegate a large cross section of the wisest, the most qualified, the most responsible, and the most successful members of society, including people's own elected representative (by the usual district elections) to search for the best man. The wisdom of the best and most responsible representatives would then choose the best candidates for election, and ensure national prosperity as well as world peace in this nuclear weapon age.. 

 

Let me emphasize again! Imagine if you remove or minimize the control of fighting political parties from the equation, which present a couple of candidates for the public to elect, and substitute them with a large cross section of the best qualified and most responsible people in the land, forming an electoral committee, to screen out the best choice of candidates for you. Wouldn't that be much more intelligent, rational, impartial, secure and democratic? In the end, you can still have a universal suffrage to vote from the candidates, chosen and presented by the committee, to elect the final national leader who holds the fate of nation or even nations in his hands.... By removing the controlling political parties, you remove not only the fights, the organized electoral frauds (often quite tragic), the limitation of choices, but also the mistakes by a vast and faceless sea of  emotional and inexperienced voting public, i.e. in the recent years, election by popular contest is on the increase, thus slowly shifting and putting the fate of nations and those mass destructive weapons from the hands of established politicians into the hands of popular entertainers. (see further proposals following) 

26) September 19: Thailand:- Tanks and troops poured into the streets of Bangkok as the country's army chief said he had seized control in a coup and ousted elected Prime Minister Thaksin. The Thai King approved it and most people welcome the coupe. Thaksin has been a business tycoon turned politician. He founded and built his computer and telecommunication business empire by manipulating into positions of control and monopoly, and has amassed a huge fortune. Then he manipulated into politics and into the position of Prime Minster. He was constantly accused of vote buying. Trouble started when in Jan 2006 his family sold their controlling stake in Shin Corp, the telecoms empire, to Singapore state investment firm Temasek for US$1.9 billion. But openly tax free! This sale angered Bangkok's middle classes, especially his former friend Sondhi Limthongkul who organized weekly rallies in a Bangkok park accusing the prime minister of corruption, cronyism and abuse of power, which indeed Taksin was very good at. It appears that the coupe is an inevitable consequence of what was building up in Thailand for years... .  

 

27) Sept 19th 2006, Hungary:- Riots broke out in Budapest, followed the leak of a recorded tape conversation on Sunday (17th) in which Prime Minister Gyurcsany confessed that he and his Socialist party had lied for four years about Hungary's budget and economy in order to win a general election in April. Over 10,000 protestors crammed the square in front of parliament, waving flags and calling for Gyurcsany to step down in Hungary's worst political crisis since communism collapsed in 1989. Monday's violence took police -- and the nation as a whole -- by surprise. Hungary, which joined the European Union in 2004, has often been shown off as a model of democratic reform since the communists were ousted. Around 125 people, 113 of them policemen, were injured when thousands of people demonstrated on Szabadság tér and in front of Parliament on Monday evening demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány after he admitted lying “morning, evening and night” about the state of the economy in order to win the general election.  The protests turned violent when a group broke away from the crowd on Szabadság tér and launched an assault on the headquarters of Hungary’s national television MTV, setting a part of the building and several cars on fire and engaging in fighting with riot police. Now the peace of Hungary is in limbo... Although such honest confession should be encouraged, it also shows that the system of democracy is easily cheated. On Oct 24th 2006, riots again got out of control. Police fired tear gas and rubber bullets onto the crowd. Many were injured. 

 

28) Oct 10th 2006, Taiwan:-   This day (Double Ten) is the all-important Taiwan's National Day. But reportedly on this day one half million Taiwan people, dressed in red, took to the streets shouting thunderously, demanding their President Chen to step down. Some carried placards written in big words "shameless" and "step down", but Chen put on a brave face and declaring from the speech podium  that anti-corruption is also one of his policies, but he is not about to step down. He said if people are so divided, then next year he would cancel the National Day celebrations. Boy! He'd rather cancel the National Day than canceling his insistence to hold onto power, no matter what! The whole turmoil that has turned Taiwan up side down and lasted already 6 months was all about the arrest of his son-in-law for inside trading, the fact that his wife had accepted millions worth of gift vouchers, two of his close personal aids had already resigned because of the same inside trading and corruptions, and he is accused of miss using national funds. But Chen maintained that since he himself is not proven guilty, he will hang on, even though the sky has already fallen down on him. So the situation is a stalemate with both the ant-Chen forces and the pro-Chen forces locked in a contest of will power and in dead heat. 

 

In fact, it appears to have turned Taiwan into a battle ground of anti-corruption and pro-corruption in front of the whole world. It would also appear that Chen is willing and determined enough to bring in the soldiers and guns in the end, while the masses of shouting and marching people will eventually become totally exhausted and disillusioned (already one million people had donated money to support the anti-Chen march)... This Taiwan incident proves that democracy as such could happen not just in Taiwan, but anywhere in the world. It's not people's massive will and complaints that counts, nor corruption of family and close political aids that counts, not even personal honours that matters, it's the hold onto power and the support of his Party that matters. Since the thunders of people's cries and the daily pounding of foot-step of millions for a whole 6 months are not even heard, I predict Chen will yet succeed with some assistances from hardcore experts, leaving Taiwan a blatant example of faulty democracy in front of the world and in history. And yet, there are other nations today where people are unable to impeach their national leaders for election frauds or corruptions due to support from their own party members and their party interests, because of that it becomes impossible for people to acquire the 2/3 parliamentary or congressional majority to effect impeachment. This, I am afraid, is the reality...           

 

[Note: Above examples show that many nations that have a history of slavery or large quantity of colonial immigrants do have the necessity to practice democracy due to the dangers of inevitable explosion and demand for freedom and equal rights under modern conditions. Obviously the oppressive past cannot last forever. Therefore, democracy is a direct but slow result of evolution from hundreds of years of sacrifices and brutal struggles between the privileged and the under privileged of the past. Even so, such so called democracy must yet evolve with 21st century social conditions to become True Democracy as its name implies and demands. Unfortunately, today the power of the so called democracy is still in the hands of a few privileged party strongmen, supported by strong party politics. However, there are many nations in America, Europe, Middle East and Far East, especially Africa, that do not have similar historical experiences of slavery and utter inequality. They either have no urgent needs for the demands of national equality, or they are simply still not ready for the system of confrontational political parties. Then there also are other nations that are cohered or run by their own cultural customs and traditional beliefs, they will surely find Western style democracy unsuitable... If and when they are supper-imposed with Western systems, they can only be no end of tragedies or civil wars. As for China, whose people had enjoyed over a millennium of true democracy by academic exams, Western style democracy can never satisfy the meaning and purpose of their political life.... 

 

When a nation, or a people, a culture or a tradition is suddenly super imposed, or prematurely introduced, with unaccustomed political way of life or unfamiliar system of governance, especially one consisting of splitting political parties, fighting for the juicy prize of power and rule, the result is understandably chaotic and often violent, to be followed by corruption, causing crash and bloodshed, as well as decades of instability and civil war, which then become open invitation for foreign invasion. This was what China had experienced when Western democracy was introduced in 1912. It not only had destroyed that 1300 years of harmonious democracy by Exams, it immediately started 20 years of civil war, and it obviously had been the juicy invitation of Japanese invasion... The lust to rule like an emperor was much too great for Chiang Kai Sek to overcome! Chiang happened to be an intimate friend of the drug cartel boss Du Yue Shing. If and when democracy could choose talents and leadership by exams and rationality and not by party politics or mob emotions, how could a widely known close associate of drug boss become the President of that huge and highly civilized Chinese nation?   

 

There is a provision in the United Nation's Charter for protection and mutual respect for individual traditional cultures and national sovereignty. Other nations have no right to impose their own ideas of so called "freedom" and belief of governance into other human societies, even if the intentions are positive and honourable, which unfortunately is usually not the case. Such imposition would be like asking the English speaking people to speak and think in terms of African bush people' languages and tradition, or vice versa, or perhaps an under privileged man to act like a millionaire, because the development and advance of social or political ethics and the process of evolution must take time and must be commensurate with proper social conditions. The term "Human Rights" generally refers to social and political rights that evolve with time and conditions, and is therefore subject to cultural, religious, especially recent history as well as present social and economic conditions. Hence the respect for human rights is also the respect for the rights of each individual tradition and its own path of historical evolution. The Human Right is always relative to the understanding of right or wrongs of each local law and tradition handed down from the past... There are enough people in the world who urgently need to fill their stomachs or their beloved's stomachs, rather than the rights to vote... 

Now let me describe here the best guaranteed formula for trouble:- You first split up the nation into a few parts or parties, then you put between those parts the biggest temptation under the sun, i.e. the prize of highest prestige and power of a Presidency or Premiership. Now you drum up the people to bear the burden of choosing one out the only couple of men  that you have already decided for them to choose and call it democracy. People are led to think they are the true master of the nation because you and your medias have told them so, but you make the choice for them. Then having setup the greatest lure in ones life time between those parties, you stand back to watch and see if they would cheat or kill each other for it. Of course, you can be quite certain that in most under privileged or even some developing countries, or just nations suffering from timely social economic disorders, they are bound to tear their home land apart. If they don't, all you have to do is to start it all over again in 4, or 6, or 8 years time. So, in those poor nations, sooner or later you would be lucky enough to put the laws, the guns or the knives into the hands of some strong man who doesn't mind corruptions or killing a bunch or two of his own people to get the prize. Alternatively, in some privileged nations, sooner or later you may be equally lucky to put national mandate into the hands a war lover or just an over zealous patriot who would then bomb some other people till kingdoms come, or better still, bomb them back to stone age, so that those poor and troubled victims can always stay poor and troubled, and the war lover or patriot could go down history as a hero and you as the victorious nation, even though it may cost money and lives of your own people... 

 

But that's only for starters. For those who are indulged in the value and pride for his right to vote, I will say this:-  The whole purpose and exercise of voting is to select the best possible man among you to lead your nation and represent your nation among other nations. Am I right? You want men of the highest quality to lead, do you? Well, as citizens, are you given the rights to vote from a wide spectrum of quality men in your society? Or are you merely given the rights to vote for one of the two men, or one of the two parties? If the action of vote defeats the purpose or the aspiration of the exercise, then why are you given the rights to defeat it? Why do you add your own effort to ruin it? How much value do you attach from your freedom to vote? Surely one candidate cannot make any vote! Two is the least minimum possible! Then what is the value or the point of your vote? When the whole nation's essential government posts are filled with members of those parties anyway, whether you vote or not! Has the thought ever reach your mind that your country is only in peace, because you have allowed the two parties to collude and share the bounty of rule? Is that why members of certain ethnicities or opposite sex never became head of state? Does the system give you the freedom and choice to vote for them? Why are you proud to be the stool pigeon for democracy?      

 

There is another good use of democracy. First you drum up the glorious name of democracy and make people think that democracy is the best and most noble thing in life. Then you collude with another party in your land, that way you share the power and riches of your land... But better still you make partners with a political party in a foreign country and support it with your propaganda machine or Press Freedom, which used to be the tools for making nasty Cold Wars, or you can bring in your big guns and tanks, then you get that allied party to install democracy and start election. Now you can say you are doing them a great favor. Thinking of good chance to rule his country your allied party would not let go of such juicy offer. This way you will succeed in acquiring a totally loyal ally who you put into power. At the same time you can also generate a civil war within that country. That way your ally would need your help and you can always control your ally and his country. In this way you go from country to country and turn the whole world into chaos and war, while you become the Savior.   

 

What's more, in most such democratic systems people are made to take the blame for electing what the parties want them to elect, and to become the pretext and red herring for wrong choice and mistakes . So with such excuses the privileged nations are justified to invade any nation and change their government, while the under privileged nations can turn their own land into a battle ground of corruption and rioting hell. The trend is accelerating fast as you can see or hear from the medias almost every day, and The United Nations has to oversee the troubles in many lands everywhere. Besides, such a system is not even concerned with quality or morality. In order to gain popular votes, nowadays it's increasingly clear that medias driven popularity is the way to win. And so no one can predict or be responsible for the final outcome because it is the consent of the faceless masses. And yet history shows it's the mass consent that usually give rise to dictators and wars, especially when patriotism is used to justify or to dramatize action. That's why such hidden potential should be timely warned in this age of nuclear weapons. Because every single war, be it hot or cold, or every single aggression, be it military or ideological, is bringing mankind closer to that final nuclear confrontation. That's also why democracy has now become a world problem and a ticking time bomb...

 

You see, whenever you maximize the influence of political parties, you maximize party politics or the intensity of party struggles, and in turn, you minimize the principles and aspirations of democracy as well as the qualities of those party chosen electoral candidates. But if you minimize the party struggles and replace parties with maximizing the standard of electorate who are selected specifically for the duty to represent the interests of different constituencies of people, instead of just political parties, you maximize the quality of electoral candidates and the potential leadership as well as the stability of national life. Systems that use people to elect ones own party candidates and consolidate ones power over people are not for the people, or by the people, they are for the party and by the party, while systems that look for the better candidates among all the better people, are for the betterment of all people and the nation. The difference marks the real intent and final truth of democracy. 

 

Therefore the essence or the hope of democracy does not lie in its name or its skeletal structures but in its substance, its purpose and its outcome. Also the respect of human rights must begin with respect for the rights of individual culture and history, because cultural history often takes millenniums to build and mature, it is not meant for the imposition of ones own will or for sudden replacement of foreign ways of life and belief... Cultural morality is the crystallization of millenniums of human civilization. It is the only safe route to improve social evolution, to prolong peace and prosperity and to accumulate more human civilization. Younger civilizations can often do well to learn from older civilizations because the path that human ancestors walked through are full of well earned experiences and humane reasons, not random impulses or desires. The blending of human cultural belief must take its own course of evolution and should always be tolerated... 

(Note:- Nations that promote legal protection for homosexual activities and homosexual marriages should never do so under the slogan "Human Rights" because no male human or animal has the rights to intrude another male body in an act of buggery or sodomy. I am therefore in particular referring to male homosexuality. It's an act against civilization, against heritage, against birthrights, against education, against religion, against social orders, against nature's purpose, against purpose of marriage, against parental hopes, against up-bringing of children, against respect from females or opposite sex, also against ones own pride, especially male pride, and what's more, against natural course and path of evolution. In short, it's against everything and against the course of nature, and therefore against social orders, that's why animals in nature do not favor it. Buggery is worse than cannibalism, because cannibalistic act could be driven by extreme hunger and self survival, but buggery is a act of choice or preference and not an absolute necessity. Any sexual act against nature's way or purpose of procreation and reproduction, which safeguards and ensures the survival of species, will cause those species to be destroyed and eliminated by nature, or by the laws of nature. Governments that legally protect the acts against evolutionary laws of nature are promoting offense against the ultimate laws of nature as well as the norms of society, and therefore will bring about self destruction in the end... 

 

Homosexuality is unhygienic, and was the original cause of HIV/Aids. Whenever and wherever an act that does harm to all these human quality and nature's functions is not right and has no rights. In fact, it's the society that has every right and duty to protect itself against any harmful and degenerative spread. Freedom without restrain or sex without restrain has never been any part of social rights or human rights. It is a timeless thing and has nothing to do with modernity or trend of fashion. Although some nations' laws protection it, such nations may have their own reasons for the decision, but it does not mean that all nations or all humans should follow. Prostitution is unlawful in many nations. The question is not the personal rights to do whatever one desires. The question is whether the act is harmful or not. If the above listed harms are not true, then I am at fault to write these lines. However, if the above list of harm is true, then all humans have the rights to voice against the spread. The act of sex is nature's only means to procreate, not for pleasurable indulgence. It passes on parents' physical life form through the sperm and egg that continue to live in the off-springs with love and hope. Such love and hope drive the parents to labour and slave to bring up the young ones. If we love and respect our parents and ancestors, or if we want to pass on the gift of life to our own next generations, then we would not abuse that gift.  

 

Let me emphasize again, sexual urge is a psychological preference and not an absolute necessity, which all men, women and animals are able to handle and conduct with ease through out natural history. Homosexuality does not occur in nature or evolution, not even the most basic animals would do it. Besides, since everyone of us was once a tiny wiggling sperm and egg, we would want to value and respect our own worth and would not mistreat those precious little lives that make what we are. What's more, HIV-Aids have affected 70 million, incapacitated some 40 million people and killed uncounted millions around the world. It was the homosexuals who spread HIV-AIDs all over the world, and those killer viruses are still dormant in the gay community... The fact that same sex marriage is legally accepted in some societies doesn't mean it has already acquired any justification, or righteousness, or just human rights to degenerate human nature and evolution, and even entitled to spread further to younger generations unpunished by other humans...  Yet it continues to spread fast! Thanks to the slogan and shouts for "Freedom"! If your kids or friends think that everything comes from some trend setting societies is always fashionable and fun, then you have got some real surprises coming soon! Forgive me for taking the opportunity to insert these words here...)

29) Election for mayors in Taiwan:(9th Dec 2006)-  After a half year of demonstration against Taiwan President Chen Sui Bien for various issues of corruption, involving his own misuse of national secrete fund, his son-in-law’s corruption for inside trading, for which he was found guilty and sent jail for 6 years. Also only days ago the President’s wife Wu Shu-chen was due in court for the start of her trial on charges of embezzlement (Wu and three former presidential aides were indicted on Nov. 3 for allegedly siphoning NT$14.8 million (US$450,000) from a special diplomacy fund under presidential supervision.). Also a former top aide of President Chen (Chen Che-Nan, a former vice secretary-general of Presidential Office) was sentenced to 12 years in prison by Taipei District Court on charges of accepting bribes of 7.11 million New Taiwan dollars (US$220,000) And an associated of Chen, Yang Chen-feng, was sentenced to one year in prison for forging documents (under the present Taiwan laws, a President cannot be prosecuted while still in office) .  

Amidst such thick air of corruptions, on 9^th Dec 2006 Taiwan people took to poll for the election of mayors for Kaohsiung and Taipei Cities. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP, President Chen’s Party) candidate Chen Chu, won by 1,114 votes out of more than 770,000 votes to become new mayor of Kaohsiung, which has always been a strong hold for the President's DPP Party. This victory margin was just one-seventh of a percent out of the total. The Kaohsiung Election Commission said it had ruled 6,622 ballots invalid for a variety of reasons. The result was hailed as personal support for President Chen Sui-Bien whose rating had dropped to a mere 12% barely a little more than a month ago. So party interests proved to be paramount regardless of disintegrating public trust and reputation. 

Imagine over half a year more than a million people have gone to the street to demand the President's resignation that broke international records for the magnitude and ferocity of people's demand and frustration. Legal courts had arrested and indicted the President's don-in-law, wife and close aids for corruption. His popular rating had just dropped to 12%, which was another record of its kind. Yet, this President was completely unconcerned, he kept on smiling and acting as though he was unperturbed. He knew better than anyone that his was protected by law and cannot be prosecuted as long as he is in office. He also knew that he was protected by his party and therefore the congress can never get 2/3 majority to impeach him. Indeed they tried a few times to impeach him and failed. Of course, he now knows for sure he is completely safe. Because no matter how frustrated and flabbergasted people are, or how corrupt he could become, or what he may yet do against his ancestry and history, people can do nothing against him. That's the reality of the system, and now he is on his way up again, because his party wants to hold onto power... This, I am afraid, is the present state of affairs in Taiwan. It is also the true face of democracy, which is being shown unreservedly to the rest of the world. It's no wonder some politicians adore and worship democracy and they are trying to populate the whole world with it. They will do it by hook, by crook or by tanks and guns....     .      

During the excitement of Dec 9th election, another candidate for Kaohsiung mayoral election, James Soong who has been a prominent, experienced, well respected and highly qualified politician (the head of PFP Party) was totally marginalized to the extent that he withdrew his contest before the ballet counting was over, and declared on spot that he now retires from politics. Soong voiced his disgust and questioned if election was about people’s democratic choice of leadership or it was all about the loyalty and control of political parties. Of course, if reputable politician, like Soong, has to withdraw, what better men could possibly stay or enter the system to compete?

Indeed, Taiwan’s present day politics is a typical example of party orientated democratic systems. It doesn’t matter how rotten corruptions have become at the top. It’s all about loyalty and power of political parties and party interests, while qualified man like James Soong stands not a chance. “Demo-cracy”, or “Demo Kratos” (ancient Greek), which originally meant “People Govern” or “People-Administer” in Greek language, has become now truly “Party- Crazy”, or “Party-Mad”! And yet, it is politicized all over the world to represent people’s true will. The public is so mesmerized by the slogan and original meaning of democracy. Voters are so highly drummed up in the excitement of voting for couple of politicians chosen by organized political force, so much that they do not realize they are killing democratic principles and curtailing their own national well being. The fights between parties are tearing the nations apart, while party interests and party loyalty escalate to the extreme, regardless of qualities, conducts and self-respect of leadership. Meanwhile, party politicians couldn’t care less how much turmoil or shame they are bringing to their own land. 

As this trend is now booming fast out of control, every month or two somewhere some countries of democracy are in dire troubles. In fact, these days except for the infrequent military invasions somewhere in the world, the biggest source of political troubles and blood sheds are caused by political party interests under some false democracies. The United Nations has its hands full in sending troops to keep the distressed situations at bay.  It is for this reason that political parties should be kept to within limits, and other quality candidates outside those political parties must be included, encouraged and provided with equal as well as adequate chance under proper legal institutions to be elected as national leaders, i.e. the choice of people by the people, and not organized party interests and strategies. It is the only way common people can choose true leadership qualities and exercise true democracy for the welfare and future their community. What’s more, Demo-Cracy must really mean people’s choice of election and government, not political party’s choice of elections and government. Party orientated political systems are not qualified to be called Democracy. They should be called Party-Crazy, or at best Party-Cracy…. 

30) Two days before US Mid Term Congressional Election, Saddam Hussein was hastily sentenced to death for killing under Iraqi law 148 people who tried unsuccessfully to assassin him. His appeal and evidences rejected. His second trial held up. Prior to that two of his defense lawyers were murdered. Saddam's two young sons were found through the use of informers who were paid US$ 300,000 for the capture of each of Saddam's sons. Saddam's sons were killed, and their bodies made into minced meet with large quantity of bullets. Saddam Hussein was insulted before hanging, his executioner opened the hanging trap-door while he was making his last prayer to his God, killing him instantly. Some officers shouted insults seconds before his death. Pictures were taken and sold for Internet publication  This is the kind of democracy now in charge of Iraq. International press reported some 600,000 Iraqi people have died so far in the invasion and civil war. Already 3.7 million people have run out of Iraq and become refugees. United Nations predicted much more are to follow. Soon after Saddam was sentenced to death, he pleaded Iraqis to forgive each other. In Nov 2006 the US Mid Term Congressional Election voter put both the House of Senate and Congress in the hands of Democratic Party. People in the US seemed to have demanded en mass the change of policy and withdrawal of troops from Iraq. But on 11th Jan 2007, the US President announced his final decision to increase the forces in Iraq by 20,000 strong. It appears that the President is determined to have his Victory in Iraq. It would also show that the Democratic Party is willing to go along. The pride of a President or the nation seems to stand far above world peace or all other values and principles of democracy in times of test... All the above facts are widely published through out the world, showing the true belief and the state of democracy today.

The fundamental execution of Western democracy is always to split up a nation into conflicting parties in the first place. The allegiance and creation of power for one party to rule an object nation, such as Iraq, always alienates the other party in bitterness resulting in increasing fever for civil war. Further generation of more hatred between Iraqi tribes through the rush and the manner of Saddam's execution seem to split the Iraqi people further apart. The increase of armed forces to put down blazing civil war is not likely to create peace and calm in Iraq. The US election and goodwill pleading as well as warnings from different parts of the would are ignored. So, what is going to happen to Iraqi people in the coming two years? What will be the fate of all people in the world and of other democracies in this age of nuclear technology... The above 30 examples should be more than enough to illustrate my fear of the 3 ticking time bombs of our time in history. I can only hope it is temporary and is the result of Halley comet's influence... . And I hope people are not blaming me for expressing my concern about the future, including my own... 

Special Notes :- The following passages in red had been removed from the very beginning of this page and pasted here to be treated as one of the ongoing examples in the world of democracy.   

I put the accompanying political letters on web (1st 1989 and 2nd 1990 letters), which I sent to former senior Chinese leader Deng Xiao Ping and UN chief Butros B.Ghali , with certain reference to Gulf Wars, war and peace at Gaza, because I thought, since then, it is plausible that Halley Comet's visit might have brought some unusual influence on the human and animal brain, and I wanted to expose those probabilities. Since then we have seen some pretty strange and stubborn behaviours among some world political leaders who are making most of the news these days... One news worth mentioning is that Saddam Hussein was condemned to death (to be hung) two days before US mid term general election, and early Nov 2006 Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak remarked "Carrying out this verdict will explode violence like waterfalls in Iraq". I think President Mubarak knew what he was talking about, because during 2nd Gulf War, Mubarak offered Saddam safe sanctuary in Egypt, but was refused. Saddam knew very well, for the second time, that it would be impossible to fight and win the war against the Americans led coalition consisting of tens of nations.... 

In the end, instead of making a phone call to Egypt and find safety, Saddam rather hide in that pitiful hole under Iraqi soil. What could have been the reasons for such a matured politician, like Saddam, to be so stubborn? I think President Mubarak was right... Prior to the out break of 1st Gulf War in 1990, 4 heavy weight former world leaders, Richard Nixon, Edward Keath, Willy Brandt and Tanaka, personally went to Saddam's home to warn him about the 1st American led war coalition against him, which was then 38 nations. But Saddam refused to see the obvious danger he was in. Since 1986 Halley comet's visit, we have seen tribes after tribes of whales and dolphins committed suicide, also the suicidal act of Sept 11th, hundreds of suicidal bombers, HIV-AIDs disease have killed millions and infected 70 million lives, and yet homosexuality still grew like bonfires, even with legal support for same sex marriage, which is obviously against human nature and suicidal too! Countless people have marched on street in the last years, demonstrating against corruptions and election frauds in Democracies. Almost every other month some Democracies in this world are in some forms of trouble...  But the most remarkable thing now is what would historians write in a few years time about Saddam and his would be hangmen?... What would his own people think of him in history, a stubborn man, a killer of his would be assassins, a leader turned nuts by Halley comet or perhaps crazed by wars, invasions and victories, or is he just a fearless man?... A couple of days after he was sentenced to death, he pleaded that Iraqi people should forgive each other.... Yes, I think President Mubarak is right. Saddam's execution could not be the end of his trace in Iraqi memory. But more importantly, let's hope that he is the only stubborn political leader in our generation. (added Dec 5th 2006)

The above Special Notes were written and uploaded to the Web on Dec 5th 2006, almost a month before the execution of Saddam Hussein. Both President Mubarak and the above notes as well as great many others had given their friendly warning and plead not to hand over Saddam or to carry out the execution, but all hopes appeared to have only made the intent to kill Saddam more resolute. The killing was an unwise decision, because by keeping Saddam alive and imprisoned, and by showing humanitarian tendencies, one keeps the critics and antipathy towards nameless invasion contained, from the greater majority of the 1.2 billion Muslim world, and above all, one also keeps the escalation of war, civil war and further violence under flexible control. On the other hand, by sealing Saddam's fate, his adversaries had also sealed the fate of history that would eventually judge the purpose of all those uncalled human sacrifices, both at home and abroad. Therefore, both President Mubarak and above notes are friendly remarks for the good of all.  It should be remembered that the 1st World War was started by the assassination of one Archduke Francis Ferdinand only. It then laid the ground work for the 2nd World War, which ended up in bringing Nuclear carnage to Japan. In recent years the urge of vengeance had already reduced a great nation and great people to act like gang-land vendetta, by resorting to ransom payment in order to get Saddam's two sons, and then made minced meat out of those young bodies by pumping in unnecessary quantity of bullets in them... 

It was two days before the US Congressional Election when Saddam was quickly condemned to death, following the rejection of his appeal and his evidence. Now let's hope that the wishes of American people as shown in the results of recent mid-term election votes will display politicians' true belief in the principle of democracy and its mandate. No one at home or abroad would like to see more escalation of troops to kill or to be killed, or to add oil to the growing blaze of civil war. Even the condemned man, Saddam Hussein, had begged for Iraqis to forgive each other. As a leader of his people or his tribe, perhaps his begging could have been used to make some difference, however small...  No amount of troops can quench the flame of rising human emotions, that's what President Mubarak meant when he remarked "... will explode violence like water falls! ". All peoples in the world are worried and concerned, because any further conflicts or aggressions, be they military or ideological, political or religious, can bring us all steps closer to nuclear confrontation, starting with a rush for nuclear defense. It's therefore time to consolidate, and take stock of the losses by all involved before more damage is caused. Let also the feelings and the concerns of people everywhere rest in peace, or rest within limits!

Besides, I still think that heightened human activities in recent years, both positive and negative, and the waves of suicidal urge, both human and animal, also the viruses of HIV-AIDS, Sars and Bird Flu, as well as the tsunamis and other natural disasters, even the global warming, could be related to the last arrival of Halley comet. Because the ecology is extremely delicately balanced, at times a sudden increase of energy in solar system, even a small increase, could still trigger off large ecological energies, waiting to explode. Meanwhile the excitation of micro-electro activity of the human or animal brain could cause abnormal suicidal impulses, perhaps also desires for wars, and in human society it could chain react into large and prolonged waves of heightened social changes, both positive and negative (also waiting to explode), and such excitation could also cause mutation of viruses. Both ecological and social energies are cumulative and chain reactive. They can erupt without warnings.  Please read page  d) List of Halley Comet visits and possible influences.  (added 4th Jan 2007).

31)12th Jan 2007:- The following is quoted from Washingtonpost.com of the Washington Post. 

"Political Turmoil in Bangladesh:- :Bangladesh is currently experiencing grave political turmoil. Yesterday, the interim President Iajuddin Ahmed declared a state of emergency and a delay to scheduled national elections. Since November, dozens have died in associated      riots. However, like its cyclones, this is not a new phenomenon - it recurs every five years during election season. The main cause is the Politics in Bangladesh, which  is influenced not by the free will of the people, but by the manipulation of elections through money and muscle. 

The present drama is being played out by the two most powerful parties in the country, i.e., the Awami League (AL) and the Bangladesh Nationalist Party (BNP). Both have held power at one time or another, and neither has a clean record with respect to fair elections or corruption. But, under the BNP's longer tenure, opportunities for corruption have reached new heights. The world is not unaware of the extent. Transparency International's "Corruption Perceptions Index," the global standard, has ranked Bangladesh the most corrupt country in the world five consecutive times since 2000.

In this environment, the opposition party AL is seeking to reproduce its loss-turned-victory in the elections of 1996. At the time, AL was able to de-legitimize the results of that year's first election through protests and orchestrate a second election that led to its assumption of power. This year, AL has already taken the first step by refusing to participate in the upcoming elections, claiming ballot rigging and voter roll fraud. The government has acted harshly in response, yet fails to contain AL protestors. Since the present saga began more than two months ago, 40 people have died in riots and demonstrations, millions of dollars of property has been damaged and economic activities have come to a screeching halt. There is no sign that the conflict is going to end anytime soon.....  " [Note: There is no need to add any comments... ]

32) In Palestine, the Hamas party was elected democratically by overwhelming majority to govern their land by the will of people, but those who talk of democracy have no intention to honour democracy. So Hamas was left to tighten their waist belt, but they hang on month after month without being intimidated into surrender. Towards end of 2006 bloodshed washed the Palestinian street again. Year in and year out, the world watched the daily or monthly tragedies and struggles of Palestinian people unfolding before their eyes, while the medias blast away the trumpet of human rights or crime against human rights. I am tempted to say "Hurrah! People of Palestine. You have shown how and why mankind has survived in nature until now!"...  

33) Taiwan13th Feb 2007:- At this point in time, Taiwan President Chen is still enjoying the public approval rate of 12% announced in Dec 2006, while his wife, close Presidential aids and his so-in-law have all been prosecuted for corruption. As for himself, under the laws of Taiwan democracy, a President cannot be prosecuted. But don't ask why! It must be something Chiang Kai Sek had left behind when he was the President. Only now Chiang's own KMT Party must suffer for it, because since Chen is President, he cannot be prosecuted, but his rival, the KMT party chief can be prosecuted. So, on this day, the 13th Feb, Chen moved to prosecute KMT's party head Ma Ying Jiu for corruption. According to the present day rules of KMT, if Ma is accused of a crime, he must resign, pending the trial by a court of law. And Ma had said that if he was prosecuted he would resign. So he resigned as head of KMT.

However, the problem involves far more than what's said above. The present Taiwan system of democracy has sunk to the point when a President can do anything at will without endangering himself. Firstly, he cannot be prosecuted by law. Secondly, he cannot be impeached because impeachment requires 2/3 majority votes in Congress, which is impossible because as long as his party members collectively protect him. This has happened already 3 times, even when his whole family and close aids are now exposed to the whole world for corruption, and prosecuted by court under his own government. This makes Chen rock solid and above the law or above any political principles, hence nothing and no one can touch him. Yet with only 12% popular approval votes, he decides to take the entire Taiwan people to unpredictable dangers and probably much worse. It appears he is ready to go directly against all Chinese people, both in Taiwan and in China, by taking personal decision to make Taiwan an independent nation. This is something any leader of Chinese people, even Chiang Kai Sek, would not do. Recently Chen had made two foreign trips, which appeared to be personal secrete rendezvous with some undeclared foreign allies, because as soon as he returned to Taipei he started to move as if  he has obtained promise of support. The following reasons may serve to explain this deduction:-

(a1) Chen has only 12% public support in Dec 2006 (See above item # 29), and for the entire 2nd half of 2006 millions of Taiwan folks had repeatedly marched the street demanding Chen  to step down before the whole world, although Chen was totally unperturbed.  

(a2) Taiwan is a Province of China when Chiang Kai Sek retreated with his KMT party there, because of  the fouled scruple with its mainland counterpart, the Communist government, therefore it was a consequence of  Chiang's own doing. But his counterpart did not attack Taiwan for hope of reunification...  

(a3) China has so far not disturbed Taiwan's autonomy, only trying her best to reunify with its Taiwan compatriots. It's obvious Chinese people would never want her Province Taiwan becoming an independent nation, especially right at her own front door, and especially if and when supported by any foreign power. 

(a4) This means Chen Sui Bien, with his now famously corrupted reputation, his corrupted family and close aids, and with barely 12% approval rate, is deciding for the people of Taiwan to go against his ancestral land, which must end in regrettable crash of force. This is an act of dictatorship and an impossibility! He wouldn't have the guts, unless he is encouraged and promised supports by other military powers. It also means his act would force mainland China to take action, which could turn the entire stability in Asia into turmoil, unless there is no external interference. But without external support Chen would not dare to do what he is doing... 

(a5) Considering the 200 years of opium wars, foreign invasions, 2 world wars, civil wars, Mao Tze Tung and the entire Chinese people's determination to reorganize and revive their homeland, and also considering the current national unity and achievements of the Chinese people under the present government, it would seem totally unrealistic for Chen Sui Bien's crazy attempt to initiate troubles with China, especially when China has offered her hand for peaceful reunification... 

(a6) This leads to the question "Has Chen gone completely nuts?", or "Is he coerced into insanity by the huge traditional underworld in Taiwan?", or "Has he been promised with some unearthly dreams by some foreign friends?", as he seems to be packing his luggage and ready for travel and immigrate somewhere. Why else would he allow his family to amass corrupt money before the whole world? And since he cannot be prosecuted, nor impeached, then what else is he planning to do behind Taiwan people?  

(a7) His recent trips abroad for no important reasons seem to confirm his action, because immediately after his return from the last trip he ordered important changes of text in Taiwan's history books, by removing historic references and records with motherland China, then he also changed the official name of Post Office from the word "Chinese" to the word "Taiwan". All of this happened while he has only 12% popular support, and for the entire second half of 2006 millions of his people had marched the street calling him to step down. If he wasn't being supported or promised with support, no sane or decent President would have the guts to go out of way to defy his own people, his voters and the history, and to order all those changes. Now the attempt to prosecute KMT's chief Ma Ying Jiu seems to confirm the timing and the plot, because Ma heads the KMT party, which is strongly in favour of reunification with mainland Chiina.   

(a8) It is highly possible that while China is busily engaged in preparation for Beijing Olympic in 2008, Chen Sui Bien might just be demented enough to slip in the announcement of his pet project of Independence. Of course if he does so, not only he would anger all of the 1.3 billion strong of his entire compatriots, while the Chinese patriotism is at its height during the time of Olympic spirit and national sentiments, but also he would anger his own Taiwan compatriots who obviously understand the pros and cons of either peaceful reunification or forceful crash with the much bigger mainland. But if Chen did not declare Independence under his now totally immune and untouchable state of affair, then by constitution his term of Presidency would be over. Therefore, all his recent actions indicate that he might take action between now and end of 2008, at the very peak of Chinese national sentiments, a peak that had not occurred in centuries of Chinese history...  

(a9) If however Chen becomes mad enough to do that, then his action would also expose whoever that might promise him support and reveal whatever support that could be. This would of course shock the entire world and world opinions.

(a10) Obviously, Chen's crazed action, like all the waves of suicide going in the world, is a deliberate act of suicide. I think his action is also dangerous enough to develop into a huge quake among nations and a major shift in human civilization. It is something to be warned of and prepared well before it happens...

(a11) Even if China is also mad enough to allow Chen's motion of Independence without objections, which is quite impossible, there is still the question "How many years or months can one independent Taiwan last right in the front door of China?"  Perhaps Chen is totally blinded to see today's patriotic sentiments of people in Taiwan and the national strength of China, not forgetting that China is also a space and nuclear power...

(a12) This leads to the final point. What is this the true face and true meaning of Democracy? Does it represent invasions, changing governments by military means, hanging of presiding Presidents, struggles and collusions of political parties, bloodsheds, bombs, cheating in elections, open corruptions, impossible impeachments, untouchable Presidencies, creating havocs and terrorism in nation and in the world, civil wars, random independence of any or all Provinces, the threat of bombing each other back to stone age with probably nuclear bombs, forbidding one nation while aiding another to use nuclear energy?... And lots more... What's mankind doing with democracy and where are humans going? What about global warming? Do we all equally own this globe?... Then there are other questions! For years in earlier decades I have seen kids in Gaza throwing stones at soldiers armed with machine guns. Now the whole Hamas government elected by vast majority will of people, resisting hunger, but persists on. Everyday perfectly ordinary people strip on waist belt bombs, quietly walk into streets and blow themselves into smithereens for the survival of whatever their own reasons are. Aren't people afraid of threats, dangers or death any more? I have not the slightest doubt that, at this rate, in 20 to 50 years there will be no animals left on this globe, just plants and vegetations!       

I have dedicated this page to the current state and proper meaning of democracy, and have described it with plenty enough reasons as one of the 3 ticking time bombs of this nuclear 21st century. Human civilization never stops evolving. A couple of thousand years is but a flashing moment in nature's evolution. What goes up must eventually com down. I offer these pages because I have hope for a better world! Driven by hope I am compelled to write without reservations, yet my own nature also urge me to refrain. I am therefore in a mess. But whether I have reservation in my writing or not, or there should or should not be? I will leave that to readers...    

34) Taiwan 16th June 2007:- News medias everywhere reported that a District Court of Kaohsiumg City had declared that its verdict for the half year long court battle regarding the results of election for the Mayor of the city held in Dec 2006 to be "Invalid", although the winner of that election, Madam Chen Chu of President Chen's ruling DPP Party, had been inaugurated in office as Mayor for already half a year. The case is as follows. On the night before election, the DPP electoral campaign center made use of the News medias and suddenly blasted away news all over town that the opposition KMT party's candidate Mr. Huang Chun-Ying had been caught with "Vote Buying", which later turned out to be not true. This gave no chance for Mr. Huang, who was widely expected to win, to defend himself because the next day, the day of voting, no one was allowed to carry out any campaign activities. So as a result Huang lost the election by 1114 votes out of 378,303 votes (0.14%). This verdict now puts the Kaohsiung City Administration and its stuffs in complete limbo and chaos, and of course Madam Chen would not step down pending further legal actions. She had gone to Taiwan's High Court with it and continued legal battle will take another half year... Hopefully the battle would be limited to inside the court house only... This means for at least one whole year, and who knows what else would happen, the City of Kaoshiung will be governed by what? By court case? By arguments? By anarchy? or By lawlessness or just by Nothing, or By Court certified illegal government?      

At this point (item No.34), I have to stop listing further unhealthy problems of elections, violent political party struggles, etc., etc., which are reported from the known system of modern Democracy all over the world. As these things will go on, but I and the limited space of this pace cannot. However, it probably makes sense that any health problems, if not cured, in time they will lead to incurable end, and then eventually the explosion of some global time bombs (including worlds wars). For as long as political parties are the driving the system, then the much weaker and unorganized individual citizens would be rendered powerless or hopeless, even if they had expressed their will through election results. Huge powers of political parties must either collide or collude. Collision leads to bloodshed and collusion allows all crimes, drug, guns, immortalities, killings and other social ills or injustices to run amok, and then only to be glorified as "Freedom"! 

                                   -------     -------     -------     ------     -------     -------    -------    ------    -------

 

( Above lists were chosen only from news reported in the Hong Kong TV. There are other numerous troubles relating to democratic unrest in various nations not included here. These examples of disputes, struggles, maneuvers, collusion, corruptions and bloodsheds are all problems caused and related to power struggle of politicians or between different political parties during elections or after elections under democracy especially in the following types of world regions:- 1) Strong traditional ethnic or tribal divisions. 2) Strong religious divisions, past or present. 3) Economic under developments and poverties. 4) New or historic political instability due to various reasons, including wars and foreign invasions, even natural famines. 5) Nations that have experienced civil wars, and memories are still fresh. 6) Nations whose political parties are less willing to collude and enjoy the share of power. 7) Nations plagued with unshakable corruptions. 8) Foreign interference, or subversion or foreign support, or external alliance with political fractions, or political dissenters, even political leaders, or strongmen.., etc., etc.. For these regions the sudden introduction or imposition of false or unsuitable style of political system under any name brings about added instability and unnecessary conflicts to the nation and therefore invites further foreign interference, openly or secretly. Instability, conflict or any kind of threats always lead to acquisition of weapons, and weapons needs modernization, which than fatten the pockets of international weapon makers. 

 

The world has been in deadlock of struggle and maneuver between political parties for centuries. In the meantime, the demand for democracy or complaint of insufficient democracy has become the open and automatic excuse for street riots and demonstrations, anti-monarch, anti-tradition, anti-administration, civil wars even open military invasion, all carried out in the name of democracy. It has become source of open instability and conflict in societies around the world. And yet, "Democracy", which literally means "Peoples Rule", always turns out to be the rule by a couple of highly privileged party strong men or party bosses. Generally speaking, only those highly privileged in the party hierarchy, chosen, decided, propped up, and supported by the party will end up ruling the rest of people. How could people possibly rule anything without the will, the party politics, the organization and the collective power, even the media and financial powers of the political party? So "People Rule" in truth is "Party Rule" or "Party Boss's Rule". This becomes particularly clear when millions of people demand impeachment, or major change of policy, such as policy of war, but political party members in national assembly stands in the way of people's wishes... [Note:- And yet historically there have been many political parties or organizations, or political leadership who have led their people with examples of self sacrifice to revitalize and modernize living standard for their urban and rural folks. In fact, it could happen that hundreds of millions of previously under privileged folks are rejoicing their improved personal life, cultural life, social life as well as national stability in front of the whole world, but these political parties or systems are not always called Democracy. Sadly still, they are often accused of awful crimes... ] 

 

Meanwhile, "Universal Suffrage", which literally means "universal franchise", or "universal sanction", or "universal agreement", or "universal support", or "universal consent", or "universal votes" for the elected ruler always turns out to be a tiny minority, which would succeed to rule the huge majority. Yes, always! And why? Because when you take away the very old and under aged citizens, and disqualify those who have records of certain legal offence, which in some nations take up a surprisingly large and alarming  percentage, you are already left with the minority of population who are qualified to vote. Then this privileged minority population, would then be split between different political parties. In the end only about 20%, or easily much less, of people would have cast the votes for the privileged party strong man to become national leader. Therefore, the glorious "People's Rule" or "Universal Suffrage" is in truth always, yes always, a "Minority Suffrage" or a measly and permanently "Minority Franchise"! In many elections, the winning votes are so tiny and minimal that they render the entire purpose of election meaningless. Yet, such a system would be highly boasted and glorified as "One man one Vote" to appear highly and mightily righteous! When in fact the system means "One man in 5 votes (or consents)", or even less, for the elected candidate or the would be ruler of the nation.  So, democracy is indeed full of holes. Almost every month some nations of democracy are in dire trouble (See above 34 examples)... Yet, Democracy has become such a moral prototype and modern religion that it is setting new national and world wide social standard for individual gun killings, family break ups, sexual orgies between men, and international aggressions too!.... At the present rate, presumably not long from now any sexual orgies between brothers and sisters, or parents and children will all be protected by law as "Freedom of Sexual Expression" a part of the proper "Human Rights".  

 

But this is nowhere near the end of the problem! What about the wishes of the 80% or even greater majority of population who have not voted for the would be ruler? Or those who have voted against such a ruler? Does the majority population have any decision on the fate of that nation? Are they are not entitled to live under some leaders with qualities of wisdom and morality, chosen directly from amongst the entire populace and not from the party politics? For after all, they are the true majority!  Is the destiny of nation, the life and livelihood of the grass roots, the blood of soldiers and the fate of other nations just a game of politics or the result of a few winning votes? There appears to be a new trend growing in popularity. Political parties seek to gain votes by supporting popular figures in entertainment medias who are professionals in "making belief". Before you know it, the entertaining stars are becoming the fate makers of the nation and the world. Increasingly, the fate of people and nations are being guided and led by entertainment medias, where real offense to human rights and bloody political actions are being drown and dismissed amidst the slaughters and deafening applauses. So here too, what matters is the votes! At this rate, pretty soon fatal national and international politics would be run by popular entertainers or comedians only. At the present rate, perhaps before long they would dramatize the use of entertainment as " Freedom of Entertainment Medias", to become part of "Freedom of Speech" or "Freedom of Press", or "Freedom of Expression", of course.... 

[Note:- Whenever common folks start a fist fight, these fights are always started by bad mouthing each other. Whenever the nations start a blood bath, those bloodsheds are always preceded by damaging or hurtful propagandas against the opponents, usually with lots of self righteousness and self glorifications. Cold wars are made by putting down opponents with words and condemnations through Press and News medias. Yet all such bad mouthing processes that make atrocities are called Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Press. Therefore the medias can do nothing wrong! When a national leader single mindedly and relentlessly wills the fate of  nation, he is condemned as a dictator. When a government spies on its people, it is condemned as a Police State. Any actions taken to protect the nation from the foreign inspired dissenters are also condemned as "acts against human rights". In international wars, attackers and defenders all bomb or kill innocent people indiscriminately, but only some are called Terrorists....  Because all these words are defined for enemies only! For oneself, it would be called "Self Defense"!... This, I am afraid, is the reason behind "Freedom of Speech", or "Freedom of Press", "Freedom of Expression", or "Freedom of Verbal Attack", or the "Free use of Cold War Weapons"! 

The real problems only begin after polarization of parties and the grabbing of power starts. Theoretically speaking, you need only to create 2 or 3 organized groups or split the nation into parties of politicians, and then tempt them with the power and wealth of national rule, and you are in for surprise if there is no fight, nor treachery, especially in some underdeveloped nations. In fact, you can be surprised if there is no bloodshed in some less organized regions. The word "Democracy" literally means "People Rule", not "Party Rule". It points to "People's Choice" and not "Party's Choice". General speaking, participation to vote may be an expression of democracy, but participation to vote for political party chiefs spells party fights, flip flop change of national fate, national division and nothing but troubles (See above 34 examples. In fact there are countless examples!). It all depends on how severe the trouble becomes, and how educated and rational people are. Anyway, the present popular system is clearly not True Democracy, and above all, it fundamentally contains built in nature of conflict and temptations. It needs to be improved and enhanced in developed countries, and never be exported to undeveloped nations or already troubled spots without full and careful prior considerations, unless the system is truly and universally represented and completely free from control of any groups of people. China once had a completely fair and democratic system for over 13 centuries. The system chose all district, provincial and national leaders through strict academic exams. The result was that people were totally satisfied and chosen candidates were the best and the most qualified intellectuals amongst the entire folks. But the system was destroyed beyond repair by the Western style democracy under the first Republic in 1910.

 

Democracy ruled by political parties has recently become a  new kind of religion and worship, so righteous, so natural, so free and so democratic as to cause wars, to coalesce forces of nations in order to impose political will or to change other people's political systems, or traditional way of thinking, or simply  to replace leaders of foreign governments with ones own choice and to cause civil wars in any nations. And of course as long as democracy enjoys the status of modern religion, or celebrated belief then such democracies and their coalition partners have all God given rights to do it. So it appears Democracies don't even terrorize nations or common citizens around the world. They are only entitled to use most advanced aircrafts, tanks and bomb, or to pluck anybody any time from the streets and take them into prisons based on suspicions alone. Such democracies are so democratic, so advanced and so modern that they are not responsible for invasions, civil wars, street bombs, or corpses everywhere. They just bring peace, democratic happiness everyday. They are also not trying to energize radicals all over the world to replace their own governments or their traditions and customs with foreign belief, or changing their leaders with foreign backed strongman.... 

 

No, believe me! I think we should take a closer look! The 21st century would be a world full of homosexuals bringing up generations of more homos and HIV/Aids. It would be a century of guns and corpses in every street corner. It would be a century of entertainment and adoration for violence and bloodshed, turning every home TV into modern Colosseums, where killing of humans are enjoyed, entertained, and folks are taught and cultivated with numerous ways and methods of killings and murders. And yet, the 21st century is barely the start of the nuclear weapon age. Soon the world will be full of nuclear scientists and technicians everywhere, to be bought and employed, while bomb materials will be kept and traded in great secrecy. Any regional confrontations or atrocities will bring about global confrontations in nuclear wars.          

Another interesting phenomenon that I did not list in the above examples problems, is the difference between traditional monarchs and the modern rulers of politics. A royal prince or a monarch-in-waiting usually requires decades, if not a lifetime, of grooming before he takes up the job to assume national leadership. He is closely trained, scrutinized and measured with a magnifying glass since childhood about every aspect of the traditions, moral codes and responsibility of monarchy before people, in order to perform and behave accordingly to expectations. Even a nominated or just appointed leader must usually first satisfy the demand of quality, ability, past training and performance, or any process that would cause him or her to be nominated or appointed. But a democratically elected leader needs only to grab hold of the political party, and he stands ready to be elected as a President or Prime Minister and to take over the national power and become ruthless. In fact, unlike the above described successor of a monarchy, in modern democracy nobody can predict what kind of leadership they have elected. Since votes decides power, popularity becomes the power base. Any Toms ad Dicks, as long as he gets votes from being popular, he can hold the reins or the fate of a nation in his hand. Such a scenario is generally called democratic choice, under "Universal Suffrage" or "One man one vote". It is an almighty mandate that enabled Hitler to start Second World War. And today such an elected leader still has the authority to single handedly start the next nuclear world war. Even if and when people have collectively decided or voted against his policy, today some systems still allow their leader to openly veto or reject people's decisions. 

(Note:- Now that homosexual conducts and marriages are legalized, soon a whole First Family of multiple homos will preside over the nation, and of course all codes for foreign relationship or international diplomacy and courtesies would have to change to accommodate it. I am afraid I am not for the spread of homosexuality, because it is anti-mature, anti human nature, anti family nature, anti procreation nature, anti normal psyche and unhygienic. It brought HIV/Aids and death to millions. Under legal protection it will in time spread to destroy the natural functions of normal human love and human relationship, affecting the proper evolution of family and social life. In fact, it will eventually destroy the normal execution and manifestation of other human rights. Therefore, it is a sickness and disorder that should be medically and scientifically cured and treated, certainly not protected, preserved or encouraged to grow and spread...    

A large mass of faceless voting public can be swayed and provoked emotionally with big impressive words, big principles or patriotism. Not all voters are aware that great speeches may be written by speech writers, so you never know if leaders mean what they speak. Often big words such as "Freedom", "Equality" or "Human Rights" are used. The bigger the words are, the smaller could be the intent and responsibility. It's much better to seek a leader who talks about facts and acts responsibly. Some politicians would use war to hang on to power, or use national emergency to perpetrate war, but once war begins they can never be controlled or stopped. Then people would be asked not to demand cessation of war, just go on warring until victory, irrespective of long term consequence. Wars invoke not only blind patriotism, but also heroism and passion for bloodshed. War had created many historic heroes in the past. In the early  bronze age, the Romans discovered the bronze sword first, while others did not. So, the Romans came, the Romans saw, and the Romans conquered with rampant desire. Then came the iron age, and the Europeans made the first iron machines and weapons, they too came, they saw and they made colonies and slaveries. Today, to do the same, people would have to use of nuclear weapons in order to dominate and make slaves of some sort. However, the first break out of war will invite the mad rush for the technology of nuclear weapons, which would then be controlled by treaties. But the next out break of aggression somewhere is going to start mad rush for acquisition of nuclear bomb materials, treaties or no treaties, because by then every nuclear power station would have made plenty of clean or dirty bomb materials by sales or for helping allies. But of course, as always, some ambitious leaders are not about to stop anything until victory is at hand! Understandably they would want to go down historic in glory, so they probably want their people to "ask not the country to stop the war, just ask what they can to make bigger wars".     

 

Yet, what you sow is also what you will reap. Quality decision gives quality products. Someday, very soon, the fate of millions and the future of nuclear world will be in the hands of men who lead and make decisions for the nation, extending to other nations. This day is already here. As nowadays so much is centered on popularity and entertainment, the next leader could probably be a comedian. When emotions, politics and patriotism are mixed to rule, rationality and humanitarian compassions could fade into background. These things already produced the 1st and 2nd World Wars, and will surely produce the next nuclear world war. And yet, human civilization will continue to gather more momentum under the banner of big names, such as Democracy, yet minimum contents. Democracy is in reality a system designed for  power struggle between grouped or partied forces. In fact, it was a product out of two historical periods. Firstly, the Roman Republic, roughly 2000 to 2600 years ago, when strong men and army leaders either ruled or were murdered. The Roman republican system left behind some 200 years of anarchy to Roman Empire, which then brought about absolute religious rule that led to centuries of European Dark Age. Secondly, Democracy was also a direct product of the tumulus conditions of society in the 18th century, and also the influence of French Revolution, when the emotional mob demanded rule of land and aristocrats were beheaded in mass. Both periods were not peaceful times, so they were unable to think of a better system, such as the Chinese system of raising national officials by examinations, or representation by a collective body of intelligent and highly qualified electorates. Ever since the days of Roman Republican or French Revolution Democracy depended on political rhetoric, speech, oratories and the public emotions, and the tradition would pass on till today..... 

 

Today, the politicians who are in power or in charge, are also in charge of party propaganda machines. These machines generate huge political influence and power. Politicians love it! Why should they condemn their means of success and road to power? And the faceless public masses, who put them in power, are herded to go along by the pressure of overwhelming political movement. The individuals or the uncommitted, who are powerless to turn the tide, can only watch the motion in dismay. As a result they withdraw from voting, and for decades, probably centuries, only roughly half of eligible voters turned out to poll, leaving each political party to fight out less than a quarter of the total votes. In most nations there are also other minor parties or individual candidates sharing the votes, which further reduce the winning votes, so that a victorious candidate is in fact elected by more or less 15% of total eligible votes. This type of system, which depend on public sentiments, gradually turns the national focus towards political issues rather than administrative and social problems, and gives it the preoccupation on national defense and global politics and finally wars. In fact, many such democracy, controlled by traditions and party politics, still bars females or minority ethnicity from assuming power. Hypocrisies are still in charge, despite the huge banner of democracy... 

 

Only when national tragedy or greater and wider human atrocities are caused, which could take decades or even generations for the rest of people to make good again, then and only then, would it be realized that certain models of democracy are in fact guided mass motions or simply said, power through popularity instead of quality, wisdom and humanity. The propaganda gradually boast the system to such artificial glory in name without much real contents. But now, the individuals, or the faceless mob who are told that they rule the land, have become speechless, because they are responsible for the phenomenon. They have sowed the seeds and they are now lost in their own tradition and their own action, but their pride pushes them to hold up the big banner even higher to justify their actions. But in reality, democracy is only true, real and hot to the politicians and party hierarchy who are lucky enough to enjoy the game and to benefit from the movement. That's why they are so excited about it, and that's why the momentum of democracy will continue to spread. All social movements gather force and momentum, unfortunately momentum often go pass the original purpose, if there is one at all.... 

 

Let's say it again. Democracy under the control of parties contains intrinsic nature of competition, fight, argument, chances of corruption and nation splitting energies. In short, it basically turns the nation into groups against each other, while peoples' real hope of leadership for any human society is the qualities of wisdom, maturity, humanity and the goal is national unity, without the use of war or national defense. The human history has seen enough killings, wars, domination, slavery, colonialism and other forms of self undoing, which can only result in apprehension of retaliation or revenge, and preparation for more aggression. Even though in the past, such aggressive politics did generate some progress in technology, scientific knowledge and undue rise to prosperity for some nations. This phenomenon has now come a point of climax, due to the advent of nuclear weapons, the increasing energy consumption and global warming. The risk of a third nuclear world war will force changes in political thinking and build a new political civilization. The advance of modern living conditions and modern medical knowledge will soon push average life expectancy to reach 100 years, giving a big boom in human population. The rapid increase of education and the ease of information transmission, such as the Internet, will generate rapid advance in human intelligence and rationality, enabling collective criticisms and efforts in prevention of  any intent of war and aggression. The trend is unstoppable! No one can stop the coming and widening of nuclear age. It appears that the change from cannibalism to humanitarianism is the inevitable destination of human existence... That would mean that humans should stop electing cannibals as their leaders...     

 

I am not against democracy. But I am for improvement on the real purpose of democracy. In my view the aim of democracy or any form of election is to yield quality of leadership. Both democracy and monocracy can be dangerous, if wisdom and humane qualities are not present. Democracy represents frequent change of rulership, and traditional monocracy represents consolidation of rulership. In the historical days, a deceitful or despicable monarch appeared only once in a few centuries, but in modern days, a wicked, deceitful, corrupt, party supported head of nation can appear many times in one's life time. In the past, to start an international war would take decades or centuries of background building. Nowadays, it can happen any day. And impeachment of bad leader is practically impossible as long as he is protected by his party. Yet, all that is praised and charmed over under the drums and gongs of democracy, or the laughter and applauses of political jokes. Actually when impeachment becomes ineffective, democracy turns into a disguised dictatorship. Mass consent and mass mandate becomes the massive support for wrong political will. What's most concerning is that all political deceits ultimately bring wars in this nuclear weapon age.. In short, it means that most nations are forced to prepare against invasion and aggressions at all times, because they are living more dangerously than ever before.

 

In modern warfares, nations are coalesced into allies for psychological support, but rarely considering the purpose or consequence, and in modern wars, individual fighters cross boundaries to join blood bath. Any random excuse without verification may start an invasion, and equally without careful verification of facts and considerations tens of allied nations could join the modern bloodshed. In the second Gulf War during less than 3 years (from 2003 to end of 2006), some 600,000 Iraqi lives were lost and 3.7 million Iraqis have fled their land and become international refugees. It is said the purpose was to install democracy in a nation traditionally foreign to Western politics and religion, but the final reality is a civil war. It should have been obvious to the allies of invasion, but they close their eyes and off they helped. At any rate, the basic principle of democracy is to split a nation into fighting parties in the first place, and the text book formula to take over a nation is to install a stool pigeon government. Only now the situation has gone out of control, and more muscles are needed to beat down the oppositions. Opposition is obvious, because invasion by historic religious foe is bad enough without having to replace their government, hang their leaders, change their political philosophy and their way of life. And yet, to expect peace, order and no retaliations! What's more, now people are rushing in to benefit from the spoil of war, or rather the oil of war... It goes without saying, more muscles will escalate more wars, and wars affect all lives on earth, especially the next door neighbours. It's no wonder some neighbours are involved. Yet, who knows! This could be just the beginning! Am I right or wrong?

 

Now the coalition war partners have helped to escalate from invasion to civil war, and from changing government with small wars to nuclear threat, and from nuclear threat to even more added muscles, then obviously to more decades of unpredictable aggressions as well as more dead soldiers and more millions of international refugees. So, it's time to ask have muscles and aggressions made people submit in modern days? Or could the conquered people of today become chained slaves like in the past? The answer seems to say, if smaller wars cannot end, then how would bigger escalation ever end? Now, the whole world is watching the show of force and the escalation of more muscles. Only more people and soldiers die, and more family destroyed each day. More and more voters are regretting they had voted. So, thanks to Democracy! This is what glorious democracy can do to the nation and the world! (Please see also the above list of more 30 items showing what democracy is doing around the world). I wonder how many more democracies and their victims are about to receive the same fate? Perhaps this is also the fate and destiny of mankind and human civilization?

 

By now you might think I have said enough to put down party based democracy, but unfortunately those are just starters. There is a lot more, lots more, that must be said.  So let me be even more specific and continue to be the object of scorn ( I have just received some 5000 spam emails)... In the usual scenario of democracy, when the parties have no real talented leaders, and yet there are only two parties, then people have no choice but to elect the given candidates. That is not only undemocratic, but also an untalented national leader can lead the nation to war and to unpredictable escalations of wars, then to years, if not decades, of consequences and hatred for other leaders and people to mop up. That's why there must be a better way of electing a national leader, and the emphasis must be on wisdom and humane qualities of the leadership. It's much better to select a mature, considerate and kind leader, rather than a young, strong and victory loving leader.  Besides, the fate of hundreds of millions must not be fashioned or controlled by two dominating parties alone, but if political party is the only means for election, then eventually the system will evolve into two large parties. Surely, there must be other means!

 

That's not all! It is also not unusual and not surprising that the radicals usually come up on top of the heap to grab the leadership. Alternatively, it could also be the wrong kind of popular figures, or the utterly corrupt and manipulating big talkers who emerge as winners.  For instance, without his party support Corporal Hitler was nothing but a screaming radical. Chiang Kai Sek was once a personal and intimate friend of notorious underworld drug boss Du Yue Sheng in Shanghai. The present leader in Taiwan, whose close Presidential aids and his own family are indicted and condemned for corruption, and whose own approval rates had dropped to 12% recently, but he is still tenaciously supported by his party. In fact, he has just changed the texts of history books and still thinks he is entitled to alter the history of Taiwan and lead her people to disaster by declaring independence...    

    The contest between multi political parties will ultimately evolve to become two large parties, giving no chance to smaller parties and individual electoral candidates. The small parties and individual candidates will find it impossible to enter the competition, either due to the heavy costs of electoral campaign or to insufficient partied support. Alone this fact has already changed the meaning and intent of democracy.  The bi-party systems then inevitably end up in following two crucial and critical phenomena, i.e. either collusion or collision. Now let's take a closer look :-

A)   A government or democracy built upon confrontational political parties by definition must either collude or collide. A bi-polar democracy that neither colludes, nor collides, is a mixed up, undefined, entangled and strangely confused democracy, while the natural and basic hope of any society should be order, peace, humanity, harmony and unity. However, if collusion should be the case, then there might as well be a Mono-party democracy, since it is also possible for "People's Rule" or Equal Rights, or Democracy to be exercised under  one monarch, or one single party, or even under a system of voluntary academic exams. In fact, in the present 21st century, the state of affair in the world of politics is that all those past imperial rule, absolute and dictatorial power under one family or one monarch are now no longer existent. Today, the effective power and rule of land have fallen into the hands of party politicians usually under the name of Democracy, which occasionally exercise dictatorial or dominating behaviours nationally or internationally (Hitler was elected under democracy). The few still remaining monarchs and emperors are just powerless figure heads for the purpose of tradition alone. Therefore, the historic struggles for equal rights or the demand for equality, human rights and humane politics should now be directed against the power grabbing or confrontational political parties and party politicians.       

      Meanwhile, there are some differences amongst the system of parties. A mono-party administration can usually be made responsible or blamed for its failed policies and performances, but a plural-party democracy can usually evade responsibility, as it would be perceived to be the willful choice and mandate given by a sea of faceless voting public who can hardly be singled out and identified to take the blame. It is particularly erroneous to credit the power assignment as the decision of "Universal Suffrage" or "One man one vote", which makes it sound as though "Each" and 
"All"  persons in the country have universally given their vote or consent to the elected leader to govern, when in fact it is always an absolute minority number of votes that end up in winning and ruling over the absolute majority of the nation. Any absolute minority group or party that rules over the absolute majority of the entire populace should be truthfully termed "Minority Rule", and people should not be lured, ushered or forced to choose Minority Rule, Group Rule or Party Rule, and then be led or impressed to believe that it is the "righteous" thing to do.  However, usually a democracy under plural parties by nature must either collude or collide, both making true national unity and true social harmony impossible, unless wars or invasions are present or perpetuated. Sometimes even then, under bi-polar system, national unity and harmony remain utter illusions (as it had happened during Sino-Japan war in the 1920-1940s). This is much worse than the past imperial rule or the mono party system, because then, the grass roots are not told to believe that they do have the true equal chance or true rights to vote and choose their government, when in fact they are led into a situation of either subtle collusion or violent collision between parties, and still end up in a Minority rule of a split nation. This, I am afraid, is the naked reality of modern democracy, a highly over glorified system of political principles, that would yet lead humankind into the perilous depth of nuclear age.... 

B)  Collusion between the two parties:-  Collusion in politics and party policy is an extremely slow, subtle, complicated and degenerating phenomenon, a chronic disease that could bring societies, even the world to emergency operating table or worse. Well, systems of democracy formed by politicians in groups will eventually develop into two powerful parties in competition or confrontation, or in collusion. In some democracies, the two political parties permanently share the key government posts, the lucrative pays, the awesome prestige, the respects and privileges. They take turns to enjoy the rule and the powers of national administrations, such as parliament, Congress or Senate Houses, or the State or the Provincial government posts. Such sharing of possession for administrative power, resources and benefits may be effected in alternating electoral terms or in continuous professional occupations, but chiefly by registered party members only, which has become a tradition. 

      Sharing power and advantage is a way of collusion, hidden by the rhetoric of competition and confrontation, but under collusion the strong fights for interests between parties becomes less apparent. Then as the collusion consolidates into a habit and then tradition, the nature of democracy slowly changes course. Meanwhile, as the country falls into the control of only two parties, and the sharing of power becoming secured, the influence and status of established party politicians grow increasingly powerful, even quite phenomenal, which further enhance their holding to power. Slowly national fate and control, even the fate of other nations, evolve to become objects of power politics. Power politics turns into power preoccupation, then powerful reputation, and power reputation can in time turn to become power domination. All that demands strong back up with strength and muscles. So slowly but surely the country would become all strength and muscles externally, while internally collusions accumulate corrosions. From a telescopic view, one can almost see the prospect of world nuclear confrontation looming up...   

      Collusion in politics can be serious, especially if aided by the short length of electoral terms (4 to 8 years) when a party is only temporarily in charge of power and administration. Yet, each government is given power enough to make war, so the long term national fate could be wars in any term of government. Besides, each new administration would initiate something new because of electoral promises, but unable to thoroughly and completely execute its promised purpose in such short period, leaving the unfinished project to the succeeding administration, which is usually another party with different interests and party politics. But a small unsolved problem can in time accumulate until it looms big that needs to be dealt with, or over looked and colluded. However, international power reputation and global power politics require not only muscles, but cash as well. Well, if the tax payers can't foot the bills right away, just leave it to the guys of the next administration. That of course would need more collusion by more politicians and more parties! So collusion accumulate more burdens, more corrosion and more national debts. Meanwhile, reputation of muscles and daily flexing of those muscles offend so many, which makes people wonder why they are hated everywhere. 

      Then eventually, it could easily come to the point of making wars with someone, for some reasons, since there are already those big muscles to be flexed around! And of course that would go to make national debts even more astronomical! Trillions and trillions or decades and decades of accumulated national debts cannot disappear or evaporate by themselves, nor can they be made good by normal means. One of these days one would have to resort to extreme and drastic actions that would create millions of broken lives and displaced families somewhere in the world. Or one would have to resort to more drastic trade practices and pressures. All these require more muscles flexing and coalition of allied support or aggression. Of course all these would have to happen under the watchful eyes of people and politicians in the world, each would then be forced to prepare their own ways of defense and retaliations, and the most effective defense measure would have to be nuclear arms. Therefore, in this 21st century, each and every aggression or domination at the cost of others is also at the risk of bringing the world steps closer to unstoppable nuclear wars. This, or course, is made even more probable when past aggressions and atrocities are remembered and recalled... But why in this 21st century? Because in this century the nuclear technology will inevitably become common knowledge in every household...      

      So accumulated collusion in politics can be really serious, as it brushes aside historic problems, and makes new ones for accumulation. Unattended problems can be pushed aside under the pretense of "Freedom" and some kinds of "Rights". What can be more right than to charge none-attendance of problems to Freedom or Rights, and allow human problems to pass on? So who needs to do anything about them? It's democracy! People' choice! Some political doctrines can often become utterly rightful, holy and untouchable. If you dare not touch it, it can overwhelm rationality and destroy peaceful orders, but if you do touch it, you are in danger of offending the Human Rights! Therefore there is the right to be a slave, to be poor or filthy rich, even though "men are created equal". Then of course there is also freedom of action too, so every man or every household is free to possess hand guns or big cannons for use of self defense against neighbours or countrymen. Political collusion allows millions of gruesome movies and videos to educate youth to kill each other, to enjoy violence and to turn TV sets or computers into modern Colosseums in every household, and of course, with endless promotions to spread them internationally. 

      Freedom of speech and freedom of everything mix right, wrong, black or white all indistinguishable  and free for all. In short, collusion allows historic injustices to continue, immorality to grow, crime rate and murder rate to overwhelm, drug, sex and other social diseases to pervert and proliferate, then spread all over the young generation and of course, rapidly through out the world. If any governments dare to take any action to punish dangerous legal or political criminals, or to bring back social and national orders, colluded politicians would immediately protect them with complaints about human rights. Some of the same politicians then literally and blatantly monopolize offense against human rights! In fact, as soon as the 21st century got started, much of the humanity would be coerced or coalesced to take part in collusion for collision as well as illegal actions against national rights, and millions of individual human rights, along with family rights (and yet people speak about animal rights!). This is a clear sign that the 21st century humans are heading for hell and for much greater and unpredictable nuclear violence! Because the trend is obvious, not only governments are taking part in massive offense, but even individual young kids are educated with nothing but crime and violence. No one asks what is Terrorism! Or who causes it? The world is already sank into deep collusion! And the trend is deepening because politicians want victory!    

      Without party control and collusion many females, ethnic minorities, or persons of high qualities and humanity outside the dominating parties  would have been elected as national leaders long ago (Frankly speaking, I think it's the high time and right  time that a dark-skin man, or for the time being more realistically, a lady, or jointly together, should be elected as President and/or Vice President. Such combined resources are probably needed to effect true change. It would show that human civilization has reached the age of nuclear weapon and that revelations and changes in political belief are taking place in no uncertain terms. However, to effect meaningful change, it would require overwhelming consent from people, but this is probably what people have wanted for a long time already. History affords men and women to make a difference once only in many centuries, if such opportunity or possibility exists, it should be wisely and resolutely used.... Indeed, there is no long-term future for power or military politics, except for that slow but certain built-up for unthinkable nuclear doomsday. Perhaps someday even a true humanitarian or a none-party member could be chosen to lead, just to break the powerful monopoly of party politics and party controlled politicians. It would also show that a new era and hundreds of years of talks about Equality may at last begin... Besides, now that the space age has already begun in earnest, it's also time for humans to combine efforts to explore and utilize the resources in other solar planets, such as Mars...)  

      Collusion of politics, especially party politics, also allows political leaders to legislate and pass highly irresponsible, bills, policies, expenditures, to flex muscles against neighbours, even to make wars, until it is too late to stop. Then when it is already too late, it still must continue until the end of world comes! There are times when the entire public has clearly voiced against certain policies through national votes, but under the collusion of parties, those voters' hopes and clear demands would still be decidedly ignored and denied with simple and arrogant excuses. In fact, a word of national defense or a touch of patriotic emotions could do wonders! Political collusion allows slow buildup of absolute powers in the hands of an elected national leader, which even historic monarchs or former emperors would envy, because such modern leader has the constitutional rights to willfully or personally veto any resolution passed by the people's representatives in Congress or Parliament. Such personal power even past emperors could not enjoy legitimate claim as "mandate" by rightful "votes" of people, even though the mandate is given by an absolute minority of populace (under Two-Party system, the winning votes cast is usually about 15% to 25% of the total population). 

      Under political collusion another accompanying phenomenon would emerge in overwhelming strength and power. It used to be the News medias, but now the Entertainment medias are just as powerful! The previous Cold War years had helped to energize the growth and the importance of News Medias... In those day, news broadcast, political information, spy reports, mud slinging, accusations, ridicules, insinuations, mockeries, finger pointing, bad mouthing, and daily defamation of enemies became an act of nature and way of life, or national defense. So it could do no wrong to dramatize and boost up News medias to the holy status of "Freedom". Since then "Freedom of Speech", or "Freedom of Expression " or "Freedom of Press" have enjoyed special privilege to stand above all things at will. It became so holy that you can always accuse others of not giving random freedom to their Press. Needless to say, other peoples' ugliness can make oneself looking very cool indeed, and therefore keep ones own people forever happy! And blind, or poisoned! If you drum up everyday and everywhere about black being white, eventually back would become white! Especially to those young and inexperienced audiences. 

      So, if it could be shown to appear that the whole world needs democracy or wants democracy, then your slightly less-than-real democracy and your prestigious share of ruling advantages would become pretty secured, cool, legitimate and rightful, and no one could ever dare to complain. All you need to do is to play the music to your voters constantly "Look! The whole world wants democracy! And you've got it! See how lucky you are. So, don't even think. Just let us (two parties) take turn to rule you!...".  Strange enough! Behind the curtain, it's always the same band that plays the tunes of democracy! And this band, or team, will rush to play those songs all over the world whenever and wherever there is a chance very quickly indeed (in fact, if you take away the weapons, i.e., the guns, the bombs and the political news medias, then human civilization would be a beautiful song!). So, before too long, even babies are singing the tunes of democracy. You see, if you try hard enough and long enough, the time will come when no one would notice the difference between True Democracy (or true equality), and what is not (party domination or absolute minority rule).   

      It is ironic that today in a certain nation, hundreds of millions of that vast grass roots are happily rejoicing their improved life in practically every essential aspect, but internationally they continue to be smeared or branded with offense against human rights. Probably because they did not want civil turmoil, or certain types of confrontational democracy. Perhaps they don't want to repeat the tragic civil war that had occurred between 1927 and 1949. Or perhaps making others looking bad has become an addiction, or perhaps it is just  the necessary nourishments for the growth of News and medias industries.... And so, Freedom of Speech can turn out to be freedom to bad-mouth, and what used to be "Brain Washing" can become "Freedom of Press"! Unfortunately most times when individuals bad-mouth each other, they all end up with bloody noses, and when nations bad-mouth each other, they pile up missiles and atomic war heads on each other's door steps. Good job that happened mostly in the Cold War times! But what about the future? 

      Then in recent years, entertaining medias had joined in for the fun! Entertaining medias can do even better! Amidst the applause and laughter political crimes, human right offense, war atrocities, ugly realities and criticisms can all be joked away or laughed away and forgotten, or made "just one of those things!"...  And when things have gone badly wrong, the entertainment medias may even be used to tell countrymen "Do not to ask what's wrong, or what has gone wrong. Ask only what you can help to make wrongs right!...". So entertainment medias have long become a formidable political weapon, and they command a lot of influence and votes. More and more popular entertainers are used to help gaining votes. Some big make-belief popular stars have become big make-belief national leaders. So popular stars are now also vote-making, or rather fate-making power generators of the nation, and nations. Perhaps someday the more popular comedians would take over the rule of country and the world... In the meantime, since no one wants to be unpopular, no one wants to talk about problems of morality. So immorality rules more and more each day, and what used to be rare sexual abnormality and perversities that spread death by HIV/Aids, have now become the norm and protected by law. Party policy says "Just collude! Don't lose votes".  

      What's more, our youth are literally being entertained, or rather taught, daily or hourly, through desk computers, game machines, hand devices, CDs.... with violent movies, and all kinds and varieties of killing and murders, the more violent, the more heroic, more popular and the more welcome they become. So nowadays students killing dozens of school friends are not strange phenomena any more. But "Just collude! Don't lose votes"... Escalating violence and killings for entertainments in movies have become the civilization of the day, and have brought humans back to the barbarous days of the Roman Colosseum, where killings of human were publicly enjoyed and applauded by men and women as entertainment. Recently one tough big politician had threatened to bomb others "back to stone age", but we are already back to stone age and worse, the Colosseum Age. Only now every machine or device for entertainment is a modern Colosseum! Every household has it. Besides that, now people in the hundreds, perhaps thousands, would strap on waist bombs and blow themselves up, just to kill others. It happens on daily, even hourly frequencies. It's a wonder why should any people want to kill themselves in the first place? Why are there so much hate in the world? What is the cause of all that?... 

      In mid July 2007, the head of Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles had finally decided to pay a sum of US$ 660 millions to 508 believers or victims of sexual abuses committed by Catholic priests between 1940 and 1990s, on top of another US$ 60 millions already paid to another 45 victims. This made the total of over US$ 2 billions already paid to victims of sexual offense by only 3 Roman Catholic church dioceses in order to stop criminal punishments. This is only for 3 dioceses! How many cases have there been everywhere? Why pay for punishments? Politician, politics and parties collude. In the last few years black and white are not different any more. Everything has become colluded and polluted! In time, it is just part of normality... 

      Collusion of twined parties also works like this. Once, a young boy came to report to his party boss, " Boss, I heard the other guys talking. They say your new plan is going to mess up our country and a big part of the world. Perhaps millions will suffer, but they are just going to watch you doing it, because they say the more mistakes you make, the quicker they'll get to take over...". His boss quipped "Oh Yeah! It may be their turn to mess things up, but we will be back in a jiffy!...". The boy was startled, then he wised up, "Oh yah! I get it! It's only 4 years, then we are back to mess up some more!... ". Of course, 4 years brief and partial holiday is probably just the rest you'll like after messing up much of the world... Collusion also means that you are stuck with the twin for good, and they can do anything they like. People have no choice but to watch! But they keep telling you "It's peoples' choice!".

      I wonder if someday collusion could turn into world wide pollution? Nowadays, in some countries of democracy collusion turn head away from 3 figure shootings and killings everyday, at home and abroad. Airports and no doubt, Internets are jammed with gadgets to detect terrorism. In some countries, millions of watchful street cameras are about to turn nations towards new kind of terror state and Police States. Don't ask why! This is just the beginning and these few examples are just the tip of an iceberg... 

C)    Violent struggles or collision between the parties:-  Other than above description of party collusion, collision is the only other  alternative and natural phenomenon under democracy base on polarization of political parties. It happens regularly and especially in nations having social or economical problems, or historical and cultural conflicts between national tribes, or instabilities caused by poverty or general under-development, or by inexperience, ignorance, misuse or misunderstanding of newly adopted democratic systems, or in nations previously ruled by traditional monarchs, now shaken to roots by the outcry of democracy, or in any systems where collusions between large political parties have failed, or by the will, plot or encouragements a third party nation. Any one of the above situations could cause violent conflict engineered by polarization of political parties. One of the most obvious and unambiguous example occurred in China after the revolution in 1911, which over threw the Ching imperial dynasty and established the modern Republic. The Republic cancelled the original 1300 years history of democracy by nation-wide Exams, and replaced it with Western style democracy and bi-polar political parties. But the result was the urgent priority for one party to annihilate the other party, even more urgent than to drive out the marauding and invading Japanese armies. The civil war lasted from 1927 till 1949. Today memories are still fresh in the minds of millions of Chinese who had lived through those poverty stricken civil war years... It shows that the lure for power and ambition of political parties can be more crucial than the love of country and people... Under careful scrutiny, democracy is the typical worldwide phenomenon and a direct cause of political violence and civil wars! A situation that could never have occurred under the previous system of democratic exams. 

[Note:-  In nature, all bi-polar forces, mental or physical, can never harmonize. Bi-polar electoral politics are not exceptional. They must either collude or collide. Collusion and collision do not mix, like oil and water, or the duel of Ying and Yang. However, collusion is subtle and may give the illusion of temporary well-being or peace in times of plenty and prosperity, but in due time collusion must deepen and rot, which then leads to violence of collision. And in conditions of poverty or ignorance, they collide violently straight away and cannot stop, sometimes for centuries, reducing a whole nation or part of world to incurable poverty and distress! That’s the law of physics and the ways of humanity! 

Today’s electoral system in many nations was not the intent of the original Greek democracy in ancient time. The present system may start with simple and innocent competitions, but in a few short years it must evolve into bi-polar competitions of equal strength. So don’t be naïve and let illusions lead to believe that chaos is only the result of temporary immaturity and that in time it would improve. For certain community of Chinese people, it is becoming increasingly vital to understand that one whole century of chaos in adopting unsuitable political system is enough to prove it won’t get any better. The truth is, sometimes it takes centuries to go from collision to collusion, and after centuries of collusion it always ends up in unavoidable collision again! It can never be harmonious because the system is made with bi-polar nature. Besides, electing a leader with unknown and unproven or simply immature qualities by a faceless and politically inflamed public every few short years will sooner or later land up in nasty surprises. It is not an over statement to metaphorize that the so called election of national head, especially when given such power to make wars, is in fact a gamble on national fate, with long term unpredictable global consequences, as well as such obvious offense on human rights... Surely, with today's advanced level of civilization, a better or improved system can be devised... 

Therefore, in theory, or by nature and by definition, any bi-polar political system contains intrinsically energies of conflict, which time after time manifest into inflamed atrocities. Those civilizations that believe in system of conflict have never ceased bloodshed, conquests, atrocities and world wars yet, and are not likely to stop. That is why China was the only civilization that had ever deployed true democracy, because she understood the principles and manifestations of Ying and Yang. As for the rest of the world, I might have kept quiet, if this is not the nuclear weapon 21^st century, a century that you and I, as well as your family and mine, are all at risk and at stake.... ]    

      Wherever a nation is split into parts or parties, apart from slow corrosion of collusions, violent struggles for power or political ideals become the natural consequence and can always be expected, especially in conditions of instability, depending on prevailing state of national problems and historical backgrounds. When that starts to happen, there is not a day of peace. Unfortunately, nowadays, almost every month somewhere some countries of democracy are in dire disputes, or violent conflicts, or electoral cheating, or horrific corruptions, even bloodshed (see my above lists) and civil wars. Sometimes on the same day, 3 or 4 nations are having disputes or violence over elections. Such worldwide human conflicts are caused by the one, and one only reason, i.e. the formation and struggles for political control by partied or grouped political forces, which cannot collude to rule and only end up in collision. The worst scenario occurs when civil wars begin and blood starts to flow. Once blood flows, there is no end to it. In civil wars people are killed. Women and children are reduced to utter despair, poverty and inhuman sufferings (talk about human rights!). Often millions are displaced from home to become refugees under the watchful eyes of the world. Such nation would not be able to unify again in decades, if not centuries. 

      Polarization of political parties or national tribes create a perfect chance for any strong outsiders, often armed to teeth, to give offers that cannot be refused, i.e. partnership and protection to any one of the parties. If and when that happens, the national unity could disappear for good and blood flow can hardly be stopped. Of course, as far as the outsiders are concerned, if the parties are happy to kill each other, why not give them a helping hand or some encouragements? For instance, just pour oil on the fire with some blown up high and mighty principles, such as democratic ideals or human rights, which nobody, at least no aggressors, obey or observe anyway! So the Press medias now can have a field day. After all, millions and millions strong and helping press and medias have to live on something. Alternatively, just give them or sell them some weapons to kill each other... In fact, sometimes it is so much easier and cheaper to encourage people killing themselves than to invade them... Why? Because all you have to do is to split up their country, then you just grab and support one party, and you can end up owning that government and that country and all its resources. Besides, you can use that country as partner or coalition for aggression to more countries... All you have to say is you did it for democracy and get away with it... Well, isn't that really what's going on? Or am I wrong? 

      Perhaps that's why we hear so much drums and gongs about democracy. Perhaps that's why it's always the same band or team that plays the songs of democracy. And whenever and wherever there is trouble they quickly rush in to blow it up. How right it is to proclaim or complain democracy, even UN fails to see the real reason and join the mess. This is the negative side of massive  use and investment of information medias. So democracy has become the household word for justification. Unfortunately, now it's so wide spread and blood is flowing everywhere because of it. It is a global time bomb!.. You see, without massive parties there will be no massive momentum to collide massively. Without party politics or grouped energy to shout, to cry for action, to denounce opponents, to pump up emotions, to riot, to demonstrate, to sway, to grab, or even to cheat, and to end up in violence or civil war, even to make international wars, then in that case, there will be no parties to grab or support, or to form allies, then the world would be a peaceful utopia. But now, it would appear that if utopia is to exist at all, it would have to exist under the threat of nuclear pollution. So, in the years to come, the focus will be switched to stopping nuclear technology.  

      Without the political ambitions, the lures and advantages, or the accumulated power, the momentum of influence and domination, or without the blockage of huge groups or parties, the qualities and the best of the independent individual talents can surface to be selected as national leader for the good of the nation and people. But in order to do that, it would mean the elimination or diffusion of powerful conflicting groups or parties, making democracy truly what it should be (still people's rule)… Looking back at the origin of democracy in ancient Greece, where all citizens were involved in legislature, election was aspired to choose the best amongst the whole community, and not just a couple of party heavy weights as what happens in today' democracy. Democracy actually was intended for people to rule, but to rule in peace, harmony and equality, and not for parties to rule or to struggle, or to confront, or to grab, or to dominate. In China, for 13 centuries all government officials were chosen by fair and square exams, while the qualities, ambitions and aspirations of would be official were checked by written performance and self declarations. Every able man in China did enjoy the same chance to under take voluntary examinations and fair competitions... Therefore, those who shout for party based democracy destroy true intent of democracy. And the shouts for popular votes can and do invoke uncontrolled mob emotion. True democracy and party democracy are miles apart… One of these days true democracy must be returned to people and the wisest and most humane leaders must surface to guide the world safely deep into the nuclear age, because the unwise and inhumane leaders will only guide humanity to its doom...

 Note:-  Many Democracies in the world began as a result of Revolution. In Revolution often emotions were heightened and easily used. Also some revolutionists invariably assumed that public election was the only solution, because it was the most obvious and simplest means. So they went on joyfully and innocently to begin popular elections. Not long thereafter, emotions ebbed and electorates began to congregate in groups or parties for strength. This was when the original purpose of democracy began to change, and clever slogans and half convincing headings started to be invented. In theory, the concept of forming powerful parties to overwhelm or overcome the chances of non-aligned candidates from being elected is not fair and giving equal opportunity to all, but that's what democracy preaches and claims to represent. Anyway, as parties grew stronger, the natural result was to evolve and finish up in two large parties with equal and opposite strength. Bi-party system leaves little or no chance to smaller parties, or the individual and the unwelcome competitions. Then the situation slowly became a stalemate, and firmly interlocked. In the mean time, democracy under two dominating political parties will by nature and by definition either collide or collude, as anything else in between is confusing and unstable. Because in nature, conflicting forces, ideological or physical, must clash, or to avoid clash they must collude. So, some of them collide and others collude. 

      In such scenario, the participants or party members are made to elect their heavy weights only, and are hopelessly trapped in the struggle, because their interests are at stake, but they put on a 24 hour straight face in front of people, and the none participants, i.e. the rest of people, are hopelessly excluded because without group force they have no strength, influence or momentum to compete. As a result, slowly the country drifts to consist of mainly two massive groups of opposition party members (registered members), all loyal and faithful to their own parties, and as a norm regardless of consequences. Then people are told they have the right and duty to vote, or to make the rightful choice. So now people are made to shoulder the burden and the consequences, but they really have no choice but to choose one or the other party, which then end up in collusion or collision, or both. In this scenario, because the power of the elected is legitimized as chosen by people (despite absolute minority of people) and supported by massive backing of the party, he can afford to do anything he likes, even wars! (Of course, there are always other ways for him to do anything he wants, or to fall back on when needed, i.e. he can always use patriotism or patriotic emotions, and cry "Defense, defense!", then get those world wide network of medias to begin the music and pile up nuclear warheads at someone's doorstep. Alternatively he can evoke the old Colosseum lust for blood, and cry "Victory! I want victory!". These cries always work like charms!)... This is the picture of Ying and Yang forces at work, which depicts the still un-evolved nature of some men, as well as the state of some "democracy"... Thank goodness, only some!

      A system made of fundamentally conflicting  forces is always unstable. But obviously collusion is better than collision, so in time the more clever systems choose collusion. However, forces in collision or collusion cannot take care of harmonious needs, least of all a stable and united constructive aim, except in matters of war or defense, where human failing or patriotic emotions will be used and flared. Meanwhile, collusion causes everything to be mixed or colluded, or simply free! Also, war efforts or excuse of defense soon become the national preoccupation, and a national excuse to collude, regardless of consequences too. Because in a system made of conflicting groups, a means to glue them together will be needed. Only patriotism leads to defense and wars, and the effort of defense and wars brings about untold human suffering, and now it heads quickly towards nuclear confrontations. 

      Meanwhile, the demand of personal rights in modern general election or universal suffrage loses focus on predicting the possible merits of the party rule. The ambition to succeed then makes a shift to gain popularity, or rather from the focus of quality to that of quantity by any means. And the election becomes the call for the entire nation to participate in the fanfare of an unfocused pursuit for any popular leadership regardless of quality, and to legitimize the occasion. Then upon such an outcome, the power of life and death as well as the fate of millions both at home and abroad are fatally entrusted in the hands of politicians with ambitions rather than quality merits. In the end, as the weapon technology continues to advance and war making energies accumulate, the destiny of mankind, including those involved and those by-standers, may all hinge on this phenomenon of immature public and humane evolution.... Let me hope that the future of the nations and the world, as well as this kind of reminder have come in good time for more in depth analysis by other writers... Perhaps it would do the younger generations, and the nation, a world of good to have these vitally important topics studied, lectured, thoroughly discussed, debated and examined in school class rooms. 

D) What is Universal Suffrage? It sounds so big and fantastic! In fact, it simply means that citizen has the equal right to vote. But vote what? Vote to give consent, or mandate, or franchise to a chosen leader, which is something very simple and basic. But Universal Suffrage makes it sound fantastically proper and noble as if the whole universe agrees with the elected man to rule or lead his people. But why and how should people choose a leader in the first place? Needless to say, the hope is to select the best national leadership, which actually implies that the goal is a qualitative choice, not necessarily a quantitative choice. To what end then? The answer is to build peace and order, economic prosperity, justice and trust, morality and harmony within the nation. In other words, to construct a humane and civilized society, a nation, a community, whereby people can live and work in peace and harmony where parents can bring up children in safety and children may grow up to be good compatriots and nice human beings, a neighborhood where there will be less frauds, crimes, violence and killings, and therefore such a civilized society may pass on from generation to generation. Then having constructed such an advanced humane and civilized society, it can extend its influence to the world as well as gaining true respect and concord from fellow mankind. And what is more, during this rapidly advancing age of many sciences and dangerous nuclear technology, the selection of a national leader is to secure the potential humane quality, the ability, the belief, the intelligence, the will, the tenacity and the courage of leadership to minimize the possibilities of war with other nations, yet at the same time to make sure that adequate defense means are available if needed... Isn't that the ultimate hope of all citizens and the basic right and desire of  all fellow humans across our world? Isn't that the ultimate goal of Universal Suffrage? Am I right or wrong?  

      But hang on! Let's take a closer look step by step carefully! Let's see how far has modern civilization achieved these very basic human aspirations? Let's also ask how far has electoral system safely ferried our peace aspiring folks across those dangerous waters of national disputes, turmoil, bloodshed, and above all, away that possible nuclear third world war!.

1), Every few days some countries are in dire disputes because of elections carried out under the principles of Universe Suffrage and Democracy, sometimes even 2 to 3 such countries in one day! Is it true, or not? If true, then couldn't some one think up some new systems or improvements? Perhaps a compulsory or permanent Third Party, or Third Force, or Third Leg to make a Tripod so as to balance and stabilize the bi-polar party stance. If there was no Third World to balance the power, the so called Super Powers would have blown themselves up with nuclear bombs during the Cold War.

2), Time of election is not only time for heroic rhetoric, huge promises, political slashing, for display and exposure of ugly realities, and in many places, cheatings. It can also be the time of assassination, which had happened recently in Pakistan and the victim's party is not reported to be conducting investigations.

3), Time of election can be also time of bloodshed, civil wars and ethnic cleansing, as occurred recently in Kenya (Dec 2007), which still finds no solution (Mid Feb 2008). Once blood flows, mass displacements of normal life are followed, then national economic life disrupted. Hatred and revenge run deep and hidden for decades, even generations to come!

4), So election is no picnic, nor festivity, nor simple fanfare, as is usually so innocently, emotionally and powerfully drummed up to be. It is in fact the open massive power grabbing or power struggle between large groups of ambitious people or organized concerns and parties whose vital interests are at stake. It can evolve to become either open disputes, perhaps violence, or alternatively just subtle collusions, all to maintain partied interests. Open disputes expose ugly differences and controversies within the nation, while collusions then come to hide them and make them invisible. In time, collisions and collusion all merge with reality and become indistinguishable normality. If no one cares and no one wants to lose life supporting votes, a perfectly good society can rot, which would then be boasted as Freedom with gallantry. Then as parties grow more powerful, more and more people and resources get involved, the government becomes in effect a power entity "By the Party, For the Party and Of the Party". 

 

      And yet, it cannot stop there, as the momentum cannot stop easily. The momentum would nurture and grow from national power to global power, or breed from national power struggle to global power struggle, and with the daily pounding and support of the medias, citizens are really impressed and kept very happy indeed. And, with the daily media reports of how much troubles other Democracies are having around the world, one can then exert pressure to change the whole world with that system. They say if the government is not mandated by election or Universal Suffrage, the government is not legitimate. The pressure and broadcast are so powerful, overwhelming and convincing that the system is taken wholly to be the one and only Divine truth and no one needs to investigate.... (Now you see what I mean earlier, it is not so simple for a single honest, noble or even popular guy, let alone a new guy, to change anything. To make a difference, it would need strong will and solid power base as well as combined facilities, and with overwhelming collective will of people, plus bags of tricks to enforce any change at all, which might occur only once in many centuries. How can an individual, standing upright and alone, not succumb to the mighty pressure of the establishment and its tradition and organized resources?)     

5),  In many countries, experts, technicians, speech writers and seasoned schemers are involved to strategize party interests. Huge funds are needed to mobilize medias to sway public feelings and emotions. Then for a merely 4 to 5 years term of power, one quarter of that short period would already be concentrated on efforts to grab power for the next term, thus plunging the nation into endless cycles of power grabbing and election fever. And yet, the ultimate result is to produce a ruling party with mandate given only by 1/5 of total population, in other words, 4 citizens out of 5 have not voted for the winning or ruling party, and hence have not given consent or mandate to the elected candidate. Why? Because there are two parties of more or less equal size, and among which there are plenty who are either confused by the commotion, or unwilling to vote for the prevailing party line and chosen candidate. Then there are huge proportion of nationals who are under aged (below 18 or 21 years), and unregistered voters (in 2007 Hong Kong has about 7 million population and only about 3 million registered voters ) as well as Independents who have not joined any political parties, and those who do not vote. Then of course there are much smaller parties too, and some nations have a huge population who are disqualified due to criminal records. So despite the commotion of election, the winning party therefore would be lucky if it can achieve even 1/5 of actual or net national mandate. Actually, even a military dictator might have some 1/5 people behind him, otherwise he wouldn't be able to dictate. In any case, this fact advertises to the world that Universal Suffrage is not quite so universal after all, and the righteous claim of legitimacy is not quite so righteous as well... In fact, sometimes it is even possible that the winning candidate could end up getting less votes than the loser...  

6), Elections are frequently used to whip up emotions of nationalism, patriotism and heroism to glorify party lines and wars, or conquests, or victories. Unfortunately, wars never do good to any body. For each beautiful young person or soldier that perishes in war, hundreds of his or her would-be off-springs are prematurely terminated as well. A few thousands soldiers perished in war would mean hundreds of thousands of future society builders to have died with them too! No parents in their right mind would want their own children to kill or to be killed for any reasons. No amounts of consolations, or compensations, or words of praise, or even tons of gold can replace the loss of ones own life, especially not for some medals or words or someone else's glories. Killing humans, even animals, are tragic and only must if absolutely necessary, not something to be praised, glorified, or to be proud of or enjoyed. It is shameful because in wars millions of harmless and innocent women and children are unmercifully made to suffer, and countless families are displaced, which is to be empathized and regretted, not proud of. Therefore the cruelties of wars should be reminded during the time of election when responsible leaders are to be chosen. Because the more responsible the elected leader would be, the less wars and human hatred, animosities or retaliations there could be, and therefore the more secure ones own nation shall become... 

7), A few years ago, there should have been a global festivity and a great occasion of celebration to welcome the arrival of this scientifically and intellectually advanced 21st century, a century when human know-how and productivities can easily and comfortably satisfy daily living needs, also a century when human societies can understand very well the necessities and the importance of complacent co-existence between nations and races. A new century should be the immediate start of a new human generation, the future of mankind and the very aspiration of a harmonious civilization. But unfortunately instead, the opening of the 21st century was announced with the bang of a war. What did happen had only illustrated how easy it is to coalesce dozens of nations in a simple maneuver of war against certain relatively weak or in fact militarily broken opponents. It hence predicts that a 3rd world war could easily take place in our lifetime... But of course, if the will is there, then further escalation of war sentiments would be restrained, and timely constraint of war efforts could be quite easily put in place, because as the situation stands now, or even then, there is really no immediate, nor effective, national risks involved from those opponents. If however, continued efforts were to exert on allies and friends to escalate fighting efforts instead of peace keeping, then it would only demonstrate that the will for normalization or consolidation is absent, and obviously the consequence could be considerable and expectable. If election is also concentrated on pursuit of heroism or victory, then that too would demonstrate that true concern for national security and world peace is not in the mind of party leaders... 

 

      In a nut shell, during the coming 5 to 10 years if the will and energy of wars still dominate the heart and the brain of men in power, then the momentum and image for this 21st century would become defined and visible, and the stage is set for the nuclear 3rd world war. Just think, if the luxury of pride cannot rectify past damages, nor restrain further casualties, then how can one expect that actual personal experience of atrocities could stop wars or diminish animosities? Every ounce of war efforts, every display of military might or intention, is calling for the ultimate use of nuclear weapons, because all other weapons are ineffective in future wars. Only nuclear weapons carry devastating power of deterrent and defense. In another few short years, all big and small nations, including all the newly oil rich countries, would get the idea, then time will come when there would be much more involved than the vanity of pride. In fact, it would be too late for pride. This could happen quicker than you might think, because there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of nuclear reactors in operation, and there are plenty enough nuclear scientists and technicians around.... I say this, not with interest to defend or offend any particular nation or people, because what I say is just the general trend and reality that our world is facing now. I am concerned because in the further escalation of wars, every person, including you and I, would be affected, and yet there seems to be no visible solution to the continued dilemma of bloody conflicts in the last years. I say this also because without leaders and means to drum up supports and emotions, the common folks could never start wars... 

E),  Are there True Democracies and how to achieve compromise? As already said True democracy exited in two historic domains. One in ancient Greece, about 2500 years ago, where the entire nation or entire state consisted of only few thousand people. Therefore, it was not difficult for all people to practice true democracy ("Demo" means People, and "Kratos" means Rule. Therefore, original democracy has nothing to do with political parties). Ancient Greece had even tried Communism. Then also about 2500 years ago Confucius in China initiated another ideal of democracy, which was applicable to all humans. Confucian ideal begins with each individual's own belief, training and conduct in his family and in his nation with an ultimate aim to attain world peace and human harmony. Confucian political principles later evolved to become a system of written Exams, starting in Tang dynasty (about AD 620) and lasting till AD 1910, giving equal chance to all individuals to be qualified as state officials through written exams. Actually for these 1300 years China was more democratic than most people think, because the ancient emperors hardly ever ventured out of their palace. So, outside the palace everywhere and everything was run by exam qualified officials only, who were all educated with Confucian humane and democratic doctrines. Besides, for all those years, China not only taught, but also did strongly adhere to the principle of world peace despite her superior capacities.   

      Modern people cannot forever live under a nation with colluding or colliding parties. Or unknowingly vote to create split or violent conflict in their nations, and yet believing that it's only right. Nobody needs conflict or violence in his home or homeland just because of a system of anything kind, or any description!  Let me emphasize here and now, I have nothing against democracy or political parties per se, in fact, I advocate True Democracy. This page is written only for that purpose! But when party polarization in so many countries becomes the direct cause and constant source of national conflict, bloodshed, even civil war, or when massive political parties inhibits or blocks the possibility for independent candidates of talent and quality to be elected, or when political parties dominate all electoral prospects, then democracy becomes undemocratic, flawed and its purpose defied. In that case the flaws should be thoroughly discussed, exposed and warned, not condoned, colluded, praised and blessed. Actually I think the word Democracy has long lost its usefulness and become none other than the reality of national disunity. There should be a better word for it!

      What then do I mean by True Democracy? Since the original meaning of "Democracy ( )" was "People's Rule" (in ancient Greek Demo-Kratos means People-Rule or People-Administration, which in Chinese would be  ), and nowadays through out the entire globe, those absolute Rule by Kings, Queens, Emperors and Empresses (or in Chinese ) or by Birth Rights, or by Divine Ordination, have long lost effective power and authority. Such primitive historic conditions exists no more, thus the strife to achieve Democracy has become a redundant and meaningless slogan, because one cannot achieve something that has already been achieved globally. What really hides behind the slogan to fight for democracy is really undeclared desire to fight for party rule . Today those effective powers of rule have already been taken over, all over the world, by the organized powers of one political party or multi parties. The chance for the independent talents in the nation to lead has been globally deprived, which is directly against the original principle and intent of Democracy. 

      However, there are differences. In the one party system, the chances to be criticized for its failures or corruptions are much greater under the scrutiny by inhospitable outsiders and by internal critics. Of course, in such system the powers are more centralized and are therefore in more danger of misuse. So, in some such systems the party does not directly participate in governing, and instead, it serves as a guard dog or discipline control for its members who are in everyday governance. In such system, there are more patriotic sentiments and less party sentiments. Therefore, there are more likely direct appointments of non-party patriotic into the government. But in the multi party system, the energies and focus are given more to competitions between parties at the cost of unity and harmony. And at rare times, Party power ambitions could even be more important than vital national interests. In the end, due to strong competition a bi-polar party system emerges. In principle, bi-polar system must either collude or collide, usually using people's mandate to legitimize the act. In collusion, crimes and corruptions, senseless killing between youths, deepening social immoralities and national debts are passed on to the next term of government, or condoned under the slogan of "Freedom". And in collision, people die, and when blood flows, it would take decades or centuries to rebuild a harmonious nation. More than often, it is quite impossible because any dark and secret alliance with external forces would prevent reunification to occur, and so, the stability of nation and people's livelihood, could be doomed...  

      In bi-party system people are also led to believe that they have the democratic choice of leader, but really they have just two choices, whether they like it or not, while really they ought to have infinite choices. Having established the holy or unholy status of righteousness, people are then led into a fanfare of election to legitimize the party rule, and by putting people on the spot and use them as rubber stamps, the party rulers may claim to have mandate from people to rule. Meanwhile the absolute majority people of the entire population, who have not voted for the winner, can only swallow the bitter dose, or watch with awe, or become absolutely disgusted!... As the scenario deepens, the bi-parties grow stronger, more solidified and more demanding, party goers become registered loyal members and the aspiration to achieve democratic equality slowly turned to become pure party loyalty, regardless of conscience. Slowly the nation becomes a bi-polar nation with very little difference in strength of both parties. As a result, sometimes in election, the difference between the winning and the losing parties is just a couple of dozen votes. In fact, in some systems it could turn out that the loser receive more overall votes than the winner. Yet, year in and year out, people are led to believe that in election the entire nation has made its choice, but in reality it's always the same numbers, the same party royals, or more or less, who vote for their party boss to win or lose...   

      [Frequently in developing territories, such as Hong Kong, party loyalty seems to command the same fixed percentage of voters in various elections, or in part-taking in various mass movements through out the years. The most noisy party of all in Hong Kong and its allied parties seem to command a maximum of no more than 6% of total registered voters, or less than 3% of total population, even when office colleagues, friends, relatives and uninformed fanfare lovers are all made or persuaded to join in to vote or to march in  demonstration. For example, there is a recent election in Hong Kong for one single replacement seat in the HK LegCo, as the previous member had unfortunately passed away. It was reported that this seat was won with about 175,000 votes, by a pan  dominium of similar parties, while Hong Kong has some 3 million registered voters, out of about 7 million total population... 

      Hours after the election the winner immediately blast away with great proclamation that it was the "Mandate of Hong Kong people!" when in fact it happened to be the same numbers of the same old party loyal as always who had done their utmost to support and win the seat, because the percentage or maximum numbers remain as always and has never surpassed the above said margin. It was clearly evident that the entire pan political camp had been mobilized to stop other independent candidates from being elected, and judging from years of performance the maximum number of supporters have been reached. 

      Now the most crucial question is, how big is the pan political camp that insists on canceling the present well established system and replacing it only with unfamiliar general elections for both the Executive Chief and the entire legislature? In other words, what is the total percentage of Hong Kong people who really prefer to give up their present harmonious political stability and risk it on a political system that has never been deployed in Hong Kong history? A system that could end up not only in political collision within Hong Kong, but also possibly with the mainland system... What if the parties in Hong Kong should someday collide in violence, should the mainland government stand by and watch without interference? There are chains of vital considerations both responsible Hong Kong and mainland authorities still have to prepare first... What is the big hurry for? It concerns the well being of an entire nation, not just some an absolute minority of Hong Kong people...    

      [Note: In my own view the National People's Congress should establish a unit in Hong Kong to directly assess this percentage for itself. This may be done by directly conducting its own public opinion poll or by employing an independent company to conduct survey under its full observation and directives. This unit does not interfere the Hong Kong governmental administration but serve as an observer, not just for development of the Constitution but also for all sorts of Hong Kong and Macau economic or other developments yet to come. So that the Peoples Congress can have direct access to intimate and immediate information at all times to help those developments. For instance, presently there is also the problems of price inflation, and help those problems the mainland authorities need to understand the hand-on and intimate information. All these developments and timely movements are vital to both Hong Kong and Mainland compatriots, thus daily, direct, intimate and accurate must be on hand and up to the minute. The Central Government has the final deciding power over Hong Kong's constitutional developments, it needs adequate information to make decisions... ]. 

      So, could it be just a couple of percentage people who persist on insisting their demands without taking into account the precious historical stability that Hong Kong people are accustomed to, and risk it on unpredictable future party struggles? How can any one guarantee how benign or violent party struggles may yet develop in Hong Kong? Especially just as now when no conclusion of any kind has been reached yet, but signs of unyielding party will, even inexorable demands are already showing... Why wouldn't people put their heads together to examine and expose what democracy really represent?     

      Judging from the huge efforts exerted before and during the election as well as the final results, it is not difficult to assess how big is the real hard core, or what percentage this hard core represents in the total Hong Kong population. Because year in and year out this percentage does not appear to increase, in fact it has decreased. Therefore statistics are predictable. Besides, this was not the election of for President of Hong Kong, so let's not get carried away! It was just one replacement seat in the Legislative Council among sixty seats, and its valid term of office is barely a few months. Yet, with the acquisition of one temporary LegCo seat, it was proclaimed that "Hong Kong is now ready for Universal Suffrage"... I think the opinions of well over 97% Hong Kong citizens should have been asked and respected first, as 175,000 voters are equivalent to about 2½ % of Hong Kong population. No offense please! But historically, admired leaders do not exaggerate and are always humble, not big headed, whilst many past leaders who had used party loyalty or party line to coerce or dominate national will were often called dictators, the opposite of believers in democracy... At any rate, it's good for all of us, if we all try to make Hong Kong a calm and peaceful place for everyone to live and work in!... At least let's not so lightly speak for the whole of Hong Kong people!... The huge majority of those 7 million citizens who had not voted for the winner are not too impressed...].

     [Extra Note:- The big words “Where there is no democracy, then there is no people’s livelihood  ” declared by the recently elected LegCo official were meant to impress the audience what a glorious big thinker the speaker is. Some big political leaders can’t help talking and thinking gloriously, and really big! They would think and tell people that a mere 0.175 million votes predictably cast by party members of combined multiple parties is to be called “Hong Kong People‘s mandate” (Hong Kong has 7 millions people), and so proclaimed that “Hong Kong is now ready for Universal Suffrage!”  It appears people in Hong Kong should be thankful to the person who reminded the speaker by saying “So now suddenly it’s not only democracy, but also people’s livelihood too!”… 

      Why? Because this reminder was really too gentle and too careful! He could have said “When you were serving the colonial government, why didn’t you cry out for democracy? And since the colonial government did not deploy democracy, does it mean that there was no people’s livelihood?”  That would have been just as perfectly appropriate… But why should people be thankful? Because if our Legislative Council were to be infested with big politicians who cannot count properly, then how are we going to show our government to the rest of world? Thank goodness there are people who cared to rise and remind us what kind of politician those parties have just supported and put in our LegCo. Besides, now that this new legislator has put her foot in it, it will be always remembered as her famous maxim…

      Hong Kong people should be reminded also, that this election (Dec 2nd 2007) displayed a typical phenomenon, which is entirely against the purposes of democracy, and could be detrimental to peace, social tranquility and economical stability as well as foreign investments. There were 8 candidates in this election, but everybody in Hong Kong already automatically expected that the independent candidates did not stand a chance or even the slightest glimpse of hope to be elected. Indeed it was the case! Any serious attempt would have to be supported by the collective organization of a party. So a second political party had no choice but to rise, trying to match and curb the domination of their opponent in order to support their own candidate, because the alternative would be the unthinkable taking over of government by one party alone, to do what it pleases. 

      However, thus immediately forced Hong Kong into the start of a bi-polar party struggle just as I have been describing in this page. Such scenario is the beginning of violence and election corruption, which happen not infrequently in bi-polar democracy, especially in the developing countries, depending on how violent the prevailing social conditions have been. Yet bi-polar development in democracy is an inevitable course. No one can guarantee how violent it can evolve to be. All bloodshed or civil wars began with seemingly benign disagreements and arguments, until they became too late to withhold! Or, they could also be supported, promoted, even engineered by a third or foreign party... 

      Recently, a collective energy had already begun to affect Dalai Lama of Tibet, this same collective energy could easily spill over to Hong Kong's future development of Constitution. To a great extent it would depend on the personal conscience, wisdom, foresight as well as political maturity of religious and political leaders in Tibet and Hong Kong. It would also depend more than ever on the private Chinese people in Tibet and Hong Kong for common sense, rationality, desire for peaceful livelihood and aspiration for the future, and above all, for their love of family, for the harmony of community and for the values of their ancestral civilization. This, of course, would include the foresight and determination of leaders and private people in Taiwan. And yet, it is not un-imaginable that all 3 regions could be led into conflict and turmoil with unpredictable consequences.   

      If it unfortunately turned out to be so, it could bring Hong Kong people, local business or industries and those involved no end of trouble and regrets. If it were to be so, then trouble making forces must seek the suitable channel  for excuse to express. Hong Kong people and central government should be warned well before any sign starts to develop, so as to stop the possibility of becoming too late, because no one can guarantee how far political ambition can lead to, and how much political emotions or passions can destroy. You can measure the urgency of ambition of a politician by his or her insistence and persistence as well as the way they talk on your behalf, or the way they attempt to evoke public emotions... So don't say I didn't warn you!... However, I must add that the present stability in Hong Kong is the precious wisdom and legacy of the past. So, let's appreciate it, treasure it and keep it that way!! Peace and harmony are built on rational acceptance, not on demands and demands again! Especially to demand for a system that generates conflicts.

      Yes, Hong Kong has about 7 millions residents, and only 3.06 millions registered voters. Even if 100% of all the registered votes had voted for one political party or a bunch of parties, it would still mean that they have received consent or mandate from only 43% of the people and 57% of total Hong Kong Belongers have not agreed to it. Even that is not proper and appropriate! And should not be called democracy or democratic. So be patient and don't rush into it... Chinese civilization extends rights and respects to all young and old. All Chinese people know these words “ , ". So, let's count both our young and our old folks among us as rightful members of society who can make decisions on our common future. All Chinese people love and respect their ancestry and have the proud birth right to that humane traditions. Old traditions have passed to us more mutual respect, far less crime rate and fewer political disputers and bloodshed. Besides, we all have been young once! And now that we have grown up, we can think and judge for ourselves, without having to copy from others... Isn't that so?...]  

      Anyway, the old motive of replacing the imperial family rule with people's government, which Abraham Lincoln called "Government for the people, by the people and of the people" and  Dr. Sun Yet-Sin called it  has been achieved globally because the legitimate legacy of imperial family has been effectively terminated, and now only people are in charge, which is what the word Democracy means. And yet, today, political powers are dominated by the collective energy of the party or parties, and the chances for independent talents to lead are effectively overwhelmed. The situation has become a Party Rule . Above Lincoln's definition has now been replaced, in reality, by "The Government by the party, for the party and of the party", or in Chinese, it is now . This is because i many so called Democracy, the individual candidate generally does not stand a chance to be elected, or even in some necessary governmental appointments party members and party politics would be preferred. 

 

      In many nations, nowadays the big bosses or the elected leaders are decided only by the party. The general electorates, including opposition party members (which is almost half the voting public), the none party members and the vase majority of public who have no voting rights, even up to the age of 21 years can only watch out in the cold. Unless a new or improved democratic system is found, party power will grow, and collusion will deepen out of control, then collision must occur. What we today really need is both election and appointment of leaders and legislators under fair conditions with proven qualities. The appointments will give people trained experts and the elections will produce politicians, so that the experts can get down to give people professional knowledge and the politicians can continue to blame the government or protect it. Together the system will even out the party domination and prevent the strong possibilities of collusion and collision. The purpose is also people's desire not only for equal opportunity to serve their home territory, but also to come up with mixed but improved quality leadership. So that the parties won't go too far, or turn the nation into a bi-polar battle field and social unrest, which is happening everywhere under Democracy. Sooner or later we would have to invent a more up-to-date and more representative word for future government as well! 

      The original "Democracy" or "People's Rule" is already effectively existing everywhere. Why not call the more futuristic system a "System of Comquality" or the "Government of Comquality"? Comqualiy in this case would mean "Combined Equality with Quality"! Isn't that just as appropriate as combining the two Greek words Demo and Kratos into Demo-cracy? Aren't Quality and Equality of politics what people all over the world are dreaming for? In fact, to feverishly drum up fanfare and struggles for People's Rule, which is already existing globally, is more like "Democrazy", rather than "Democracy". Isn't it so, or not? 

      O.K. Say, we continue to use the terminology, then how can nuclear age people make democracy work with more equal chance and equal rights, and yet with less violent conflicts within the nation and as well as with less international interference? There must be numerous ways, solutions or improvements that numerous clever people can think of, each suitable and commensurate to their inherited historical way of life and their particular modern needs. Obviously, every nation has its tradition, philosophy, culture, belief and language developed over millenniums. Why should they turn their accustomed way of life upside down into systems that would end in up in collusion, collision or civil wars?...  The present type of Democratic systems, in many nations, are breeding ambitious or selfish politicians who are given enough powers to make enemies all over the world for their people, or to bring the entire human communities into either national conflicts or world conflicts... Let's imagine. How many nations, out of self defense, hatred or revenge, past or present, are desirous of purchasing nuclear bomb materials and discreetly hide them away, so that someday they can be quickly made into bombs? No one knows many have already done so. Nuclear material are being manufactured by hundreds of power plants everyday already and there will be lots more. How many nuclear technicians are likely to give away or sell their know how? How does one know that ones own technicians are not selling out too?...

      For me, True Democracy or "Comquality" in the nuclear 21st century should be a political system that could best resemble the original tiny state of democracy in ancient Greece, or the Chinese system of examinations, which had successfully given China 1300 years of peaceful civilization. Both system had produced quality leadership under true equal opportunities. Of course, in modern conditions it would be difficult or even impossible to repeat history. Then at least modern systems ought to encompass the following two major considerations. 1) The avoidance to form strong and selfish political parties, which perpetually render the people and the nation in conflict and struggle, especially the formation of two equally powerful parties, which would end up in either collusion, or collision, or even bloodshed. 2) A system that would allow qualities of leader to surface, i.e., a selection by quality and not by quantity. By putting the two major considerations into practice, it would mean that the traditions of electoral system for certain percentage of legislative seats should continue, it should nevertheless disallow political parties to monopolize the entire elections, and therefore, to dominate the government. In addition, respected talents and proven leaders of the entire society, either by election or by appointment from their individual professions, should be allowed to sit and participate in the government administration. 

      Leaders of professional sectors are more down to earth and realistic. They gain their respect and position through solid professional knowledge, experience and performance, and do not indulge in arousing political rhetoric or inflammatory speeches. They do not depend on party support and are not obliged to conform to party lines. Therefore, when making decisions for the government and the people, they are free to use their conscience, industrial experiences and personal judgments. So, let us promote qualities and practical experience to compete and flourish inside the government, and minimize inflammatory political rhetoric, or personal showmanship. Above all, let us construct our home legislative system to be commensurate with our special needs and in harmony with the needs of the massive population and government in the mainland. As the mainland system is progressing fast, Hong Kong must not stay stagnant. Everything changes with time! This is the 21st century, so let us think and live in the 21st century... Of course, such governmental structure is comparatively new, so time is needed to perfect the system... However, in this respect, I have made some trivial personal suggestions for this very early days of special development in my home region, which you will read in upcoming paragraphs. They are suggested for Hong Kong only, and subject to timely amendments. 

      Why? Because Hong Kong is a very small but also very special territory, as she has only recently changed sovereignty. She is given a chance to create and initiate her own brand new autonomic constitutional system. It goes without saying such system must include considerations of her way of life passed down from her colonial past, also now the inevitable reinvigoration and re-emergence of Chinese historical and philosophical influence, also the needs of present day mainland and Hong Kong Chinese people, plus the aspirations and future for both said peoples, as well as how such tiny autonomy's plans to live and act with the demands of Asian and international communities. She needs foresight, careful, wise planning and step by step forward experiments as well as much time to do all that! Even an infant must learn to walk before it can run, and only then in the end, Hong Kong can grow up strong and wise in the 21st century world, perhaps even with her own talents and contributions too. Her life and responsibility as a tiny new autonomy amidst the unrelenting demands of reality from her internal and the external world are heavy and tough, to which she was not previously prepare for. Therefore, I advocate sensible, slow and safe developments, and do not encourage strong political conflicts by strongly grouped or inflated or any extreme emotional energies, because the memories of Chinese civil war atrocities are still fresh in the minds of millions of Chinese people, and I am one of them.

      However, I keep my mind open and do not insist. I also think that one political system good for one land may not be good for another in a certain point of history. Well, if it wasn't for the change of time, China would still be practicing democratic selection by exams. To me, true democracy is a humane rationality and conformity of the ever evolving reality, and not a blind timeless belief! To insist is to be undemocratic! Any political system that concerns millions should not be the crusade of ones own personal ambition or belief, at least not before one makes a thorough study over it. To avoid the whole community or country from walking into an unknown abyss, take care not to let the blind leading the blind. Political motion needs careful, deep, humane and responsible considerations, as well as time, plenty of time to mature, and consensus, plenty of consensus. What's more, a local culture or tradition is a always strong momentum of human energy. To respect other people's culture is to be respected by others, and the only way to be democratic, as well as the safe way to live in this nuclear age....

Hong Kong is special

1)      Hong Kong (including Macau) is a special place at a special moment in history. It is a special, because size wise she is tiny, and was once referred to as just a Sesame Seed. It can never be an independent territory unless China wants it to be, even then it would not be because both local and mainland people would not allow it. Hong Kong is now living a special moment in her life, because she has just been returned to her motherland. It is understandable that any mother would now protect and welcome her returning daughter with fondness and compassion. Yet everything is still under transition and rather new. Many local and mainland people are rediscovering each other by visits. It will yet take some time to completely relive the past kinship, as well as to build a common future with empathy. It would be extremely unwise, even willful, to introduce some strange and new, even impatient political ideals, belief or demands strongly unaccustomed to the history of both parties at this special moment in history, unless, of course, you don’t care, or perhaps there are other ulterior purposes. At such special moments everyone would need rationality, commonality, empathy and above all, patience, not demands, and then demands again!

2)      Hong Kong is special in culture, in education, in political belief and in traditions. Hong Kong people are over 90% pure Chinese descents who speak, think and write in Chinese language, and whose parents are very traditional Chinese people. Therefore, in many ways Hong Kong people retain traditional values still very strongly, even though mainland China has passed through huge social reorganization. China has now become a brand new modern state, brought into being by her own experience and her historic background, and therefore her own system with her own characteristics. However, it would appear that China was prepared to go to war with Britain if conflict had emerged in the 1990s, but thanks to both Britain and China, there was no conflict, and China was left with the prepared resources, which enabled her to effect her post 1997 expansive and quick developments in all aspects. 

Anyway, the influx of mainland people into Hong Kong occurred largely before the historic reorganization in the mainland. So most Hong Kong people carried with them old traditional ways into the territory. Traditionally minded Chinese people are humanitarians, home and business builders, and not politicians, because Chinese civilization had allowed its people enjoy 1300 years of true democracy by raising all members of government through nation wide exams. Thus for 1300 years the governance of nation was effectively given in the hands of people, especially only to those educated, selected and qualified people. Unfortunately during the recent past history, the clouds of opium smoke went into the head, and amidst the gun smoke of opium wars, people lost clear sight and became so confused that they thought true democracy was not good enough. They’d rather have political parties and civil wars.

In fact, even today the smokes and clouds created by medias are still so thick that many people cannot see that rule by conflicting parties can only lead to either deepening collusion or violent collision. It is therefore vital to understand first the true implications and complications of any political system before adopting it, because politics is not always rational, but emotional, and it can be inflamed and used to generate turmoil and civil wars that could linger for decades, even centuries. Then when that happens, it would again require very strong leaders to reorganize from the roots up. Otherwise unthinkable consequences could follow and the nation would be doomed forever.  

Because of the Chinese historic legacy, which produced government through exam selection with strong infusion of Confucian humanistic principles (in fact, historic beliefs are under going revival at great pace), the real Chinese hearts still judge and evaluate their leaders with intellectual and human qualities rather than the ability for street corner political rhetoric or inflaming speeches (I doubt Hong Kong people would ever get to that state). That is to say, Chinese people understand leadership through qualitative selection far better than quantitative choice, which would give unknown outcome and performance. In fact, the vase majority of Hong Kong people still do not know what Western democracy truly entails. Some even have no idea how the system is really structured. They just follow the noise and shouts, thinking that it must be something wonderful without taking a close look or any proper investigation. 

Actually a vase number of people in the world fail to see that every few days some nations of democracy are in dire trouble of corruption or violence, without a clear hope of solution. Many people just vainly wait for it to get better all by itself, when all they need is to put their heads together to question and identify the real cause of trouble and then tackle it with intelligence and humanity. In fact, the human kind is presently in urgent need of a collective and global understanding of co-existence in this increasingly dangerous century of nuclear technology and weapons. Hong Kong, due to her small size and good average level of education, is in a privileged and unique position to test and experiment her new constitutional development with both the legacies of the East and West for the long and perilous nuclear centuries ahead. Who knows, Hong Kong may yet turn out something the world really needs. There is no need whatsoever to rush into any hasty decisions or systems with impatience and with strong insistence.

Whatever new proposals developing here or elsewhere should bear the consideration for a dangerous and wholly equipped nuclear century ahead. And as for Hong Kong, any new constitutional system to be established here must bear the implications of the past and the prospects of the future. It is also immensely important, and a course of nature, to exercise tolerance and expectation for a future development, which may be mutually compatible and harmonious with that of mainland China. The parents in Hong Kong today should also think and prepare for the harmonious distant future for their children. Consequently, rationality, patience, harmony and much time are all needed at this special historic junction. Any government officials and political leaders charged with responsibilities for the whole territory, especially those paid by public money, should be able to understand and facilitate these needs, and behave accordingly…            

Now let me briefly describe how this small town Hong Kong is doing her best to bring into being the first experimental version of improved electoral or democratic system in the world. So, please bare with me a bit more! Forgive me if I am long winded. I also know this writing is long and tedious, but I just want to make sure that I've missed nothing ... .  

The New Proposal:- 

The new Hong Kong system is presently under preparation. So I m not entitled, nor informed, to describe the any details. Only a rough impression may be derived from my own observations. Let me repeat, the following short description is purely my own expectation of the system  The main idea is to maximize representation from different important sectors of society, and to minimize or eliminate the control and interests of political parties, as well as the fights, the brawls, the clashes, the riots, even the bloodshed, caused by the complaints of frauds, cheatings and irregularities in election and between the parties that are causing national instability in so many countries around the world, whose consequence often affects the entire term of election, which is what's also going on in elections around the world (see above list of more than 30 items)... It would be nice to revert to the historic system of raising government servants by different grades of strict exams that was successfully practiced in China from early 7th century until 1910, but the system had been destroyed beyond repair. Besides, any present day system should be commensurate with international traditions in order to be appreciated.....  Therefore, in order to maximize representation, a large body of electorates is formed, say beginning with at least 800 individuals for smaller regions, and say up to 2000 individual members for large countries ( the size of this Electoral Committee may be greatly varied depending on the size and needs of the country or territory). But the system should be carefully tested to get experience first. .   

The Electoral Committee may consists of the following groups :- This proposal is initiated in Hong Kong as a consideration for application in a "State" a "Territory".  

(1) The group of professional civil servants who are already responsible for daily function of the government. This group consists of public servants from various governmental departments whose trust, expertise, performance and responsibilities are being scrutinized under public eyes and well established through daily intercourse with the entire populace. This group includes departments that are responsible for peace and security of the society, as well as those responsible for national security and defense. Members of this group are to be designated by the government. The participation of this group injects expertise, experience, responsibility and stability into the Electoral Committee.  

(2) The group of politicians, either members of political parties or independent, directly elected by the grass roots through district elections. The methods and manners with which elected members are included into the Electoral Committee are to be determined. The participation of this group maintains the democratic ideals of district election and people's own participation in the choice of leadership.

(3) An large important group, whose size and mode of selection for members are still under development. This group represents other functional public sectors, or functional constituencies, such as education, science, economy, commerce, including industry, public health, banking, news medias, acclaimed social workers, mass transport, food, hotel, even religion, etc., etc.. These members may be chosen either by election i their own sectors, like the district elected politicians, or by qualification in their professional guilds and organizations, or by invitation because of proven performance. These people may be appointed by the rules, authority and wisdom of the government or by a special division of the Electoral Committee. These guys are true leaders in their professions because they usually do not talk themselves into leadership, they prove it by their industrial success and merits. The participation of this group injects responsible experience and working knowledge from different functional sectors of society. The influence of this group may be kept within limits, or enlarged, depending on further discussions and results of experimentations. However, members chosen must be only nationals and totally free of any foreign political allegiance (unless specifically exempted), because all nations or territories have their own established or historic way of life, which only their own people have the rights to decide and to change or to improve.

(4) A good contingent of individuals who hold the highest qualifications in different fields of education, science and technology, such as advanced or "state of the art" sciences. They are included because of their exceptionally advanced knowledge and up to date intellectual training and capacities. Their admittance are totally democratic, none political and do not come easy, at least not by words or rhetoric, but by solid qualification alone. The participation or inclusion of this group in the decision making enhances the quality of Electoral Committee and advanced knowledge in space age governance and keep in phase with national progress in science. The qualification of such individuals should be selected by a special division of the Electoral Committee with certain predetermined specification, and not included in the selection of Functional Constituencies.  However, this group should be considered optional also for the time being, pending discussions or experimentations. 

(5) Finally another optional group consisting of a small number of specially appointed members chosen because of their extraordinary personal merits and achievements. From time to time, a society can produce some sons and daughters who honor their society with their achievements in inventions, or sports, or any field of locally or globally recognized honours. The participation and inclusion of this group in the decision of construction and making of a government may impart support, encouragement, integrity, respect and trust for the Committee to and from both domestic or international communities and commitments. 

[The above 5 groups combine to give a widened democracy and an enlarged democratic electoral system, where standards of quality, experience and scientific knowledge are enhanced, and political motivation and campaign rhetoric are lessened. The increased sharing of responsibility stabilizes the entire electoral system and ensures more reliability for the outcome of election... Some of the functional constituencies, for instance, education, or transport, or finance sectors, etc., represent just as many populations as district elections, because the votes cast for district elected members are quite small. Theoretically speaking the size or importance of responsibility is accountable by the numbers of votes or numbers of people the members represent.

 

It should be noted that modern national life and national administration are getting more and more complex and advanced by the day. The function of district election is only one among many of organs that make a complete national administration workable. And in turn the national administration is only one among many organs that give a nation its complete vitality and life. For instance, the all important and most vital organ is still the body of professional (or none elected) civil servants who maintain the daily business of governance under public scrutiny, and thus national functions (but always unfairly attacked by election campaign rhetoric). There are many other sectors that give life and vitality to a nation, such as economic, educational, judicial, legislative, executive, law and order, national defense, health, moral organs... and so on. Each serves a function in the healthy national life. They are all part of the same people. They are all basic and vital  parts of people's governance.  Therefore, each has the rights and the duties to ensure not only its own functional vitality, but also the vitality of the entire community. Consequently, not only election of the legislature, but also the election of national leadership should not be monopolized only by district elected politicians alone, but shared by other important organic members and functional sectors of society. In the increasingly complex nuclear age society, proven capacities of trust and responsibility, of experience and of solid quality (not speech making politics) are vital to modern national life in the competitive, extremely technical and highly advanced "state of the art" world.]   

The above 5 groups of best qualified members of society from different sectors will form an Electoral Committee consisting of 800 up to 2000 members depending on the size of population or of the State, and because not only they represent all the important sectors of society, but they also represent the best and most qualified members from their sectors, they will be given the trust, the rules for minimum qualification of electoral candidates and the authority to elect the Head or Heads for the State. The emphasis is focused on the fact that quality minds will give quality decision and quality choice for the State... Having established this all important Electoral Committee, now all individual citizens within the populace are equally entitled to submit his application as a candidate for election, and every specified sector or qualified organization of the society may also submit its own chosen candidate for election. Naturally this could mean a reasonably large list of candidates are submitted. The rules of the Electoral Committee would automatically screen out only the qualified candidates for final voting. And the main responsibility of the Electoral Committee is to elect the final leaders of nation out of those qualified candidates. If necessary, members of the Committee will declare and pledge to up hold certain principles and guidelines that would ensure the security of the nation and the interest of people... 

The mode of final election could be carried out in two following ways :-. 

(A) The voting by the Electoral Committee now finalizes the process and goal of the election, and the successfully chosen candidate is now the elected Head of State. Alternatively, instead of one, two candidates may be elected to be the Head and Deputy Head of the State. 

(B) The voting by Electoral Committee has not yet reached the conclusive goal of the electoral process, but the Committee has successfully elected a number of say 2 to 5 of candidates for final election. This final election is then optionally staged and carried out in the form of a universal suffrage. The purpose is to give the public a chance to elect who should be the Head (and the Deputy Head) of State. However, this additional universal suffrage may be held as an optional device under consideration.

 [Note:-  I have described this Hong Kong proposal as a "State" or "national" process because the system is applicable to any big and small states or nations... Currently the President and Vice President of United States are also elected "indirectly" by a body of electors called "United States Electoral College", which consists of only 538 members, and is therefore smaller compared with Hong Kong's Electoral Committee, which has 800 members. The US system works as follows:- First, these 538 members of the US Electoral College are elected by General Election, and then they are given the job to subsequently elect a President and Vice President of United States. A lot of people around the world have misconceived that the US President is a "directly" elected by people under "One man, One vote" system, in fact the US President and his running mate are not directly elected by the grass roots, but elected by similar group of electors, who are successful candidates of district elections, only the number of "US Electoral College" is smaller than Hong Kong's Electoral Committee. The big difference between the US system and Hong Kong system is that the members of US Electoral College are completely put forward by political parties, in other words, they are all party members. Therefore they are entirely party orientated and represent only the interests of their own parties, while the Hong Kong system is not party supported or party controlled, and therefore do not fight for their parties. Since they have no party interest at heart, and also they cannot elect a Chief just for their personal interest, they have to elect a Chief for the future and whole of Hong Kong. The members of the proposed Hong Kong Electoral Committee, from my point of view, represent the most responsible, best qualified and most important representatives from the Hong Kong citizenry, listed in above 5 groups. This Electoral Committee is not a "Small Cycle of Election" as branded by some people, considering that the US Electoral College has only 538 electorates. The US has more than 40 times population, but her total electorates for Presidency is only 2/3 of Hong Kong Electoral Committee. Sharing that between 2 political parties, it means the US Presidency is elected only by an equivalent of 1/3 the Hong Kong Committee ] 

Advantages of New Hong Kong Proposal:-  This new system has many advantages over the political party based electoral system:-. 

1) Truer Democracy:- The Hong Kong system is a True Democracy, which is a big improvement and much more democratic than party orientated electoral systems with party interests and party control. Under the proposed Hong Kong electoral system, although the establishments and identities of political parties are respected, the election will be so designed that political parties are not given the chance to monopolize the candidacy and outcome of the election for the head of State. Any qualified Hong Kong citizens have the equal rights to be elected to become head the State and hold the rein of power in his hand. However, because the head of State affects the fate of the State and the entire people, therefore a process to determine minimum qualification is required. Also members of Electoral Committee have the equal rights to be chosen by measure of high degree qualifications, for instance, either by district election, or by proven governmental responsibilities, or by academic qualifications, or by successful leadership in various industries, or by recognized honours of special achievements. All these are the best, the most responsible, the most desired and honoured leadership qualities in any society, whose combined vision and judgment would affect everyone and are hard to better, and therefore can be trusted to elect the leadership suitable for building an advanced society. Such a system is much closer to the historical Chinese system of raising responsible officials by exams, i.e. by qualities or by intellectual qualifications with equal opportunities. This "Exam Raised" system has not only given Chinese people 13 centuries of harmonious and successful cultural life, but has also long become the true characteristics of the Chinese civilization and precious national legacy. 

2) Quality of electors and elected:- The emphasis is focused on the quality of the elected leader or leaders, because the better quality of the Electoral Committee will produce the better quality of the elected leader or leaders. If a Deputy leader is also elected in the process, then that Deputy is also qualitatively elected. In this way, both elected leaders are qualitatively chosen and given the vital mandate to lead. The quality and members of the Electoral Committee also become directly responsible for the outcome of their choice, which is by far better than the votes of party politics or the votes of a sea of faceless public with mixed emotion and average intelligence [Note: The mock emotions of the French Revolution had considerably influenced the development of subsequent democracy]. After all, the entire goal of election is to produce the best, the wisest, and the most humane or considerate State leadership anyway. The act of electing a national leader is also the act of selecting the fate of nation, therefore the intelligence and visions of the electorates are more vital than the argument and selfish demand of personal rights to vote. For instance, if a leader of any community or a CEO of any industry is intelligent and visionary enough to make himself or herself successful in today's competitive business, then he or she should have enough visions to choose the best of electoral candidates. Community leaders are themselves the best of the community compared with the average. Think of the collective strength of intellectual power and visions when 800 to 2000, or more, of the country's proven leading brains are combined together to choose the most promising national leader, compared with the emotions and average intelligence of a massive public. Even the combined strength of all the politicians in Parliament and Senate Houses are not necessarily better than hundreds or thousands of the most successful or the best proven brains of all fields in the nation... 

In short, the Electoral Committee is the condensation of the most powerful, intelligent, responsible and visionary thinkers in the State, therefore, the size of the committee needs not be unnecessarily large or in excess. The essence is on quality, not quantity, because the final goal is for quality! Ever since the beginning of human history, human societies have been led by the quality of leaders. History has witnessed many times that a single quality brain was enough to initiate a whole new civilization, no matter how overwhelming the force of resistance was.  There are also times, a sea of emotional public would tend to choose a popular figure, regardless of his or her quality or professional suitability. Yet a single wrong leadership is also enough to cause decades of untold humane sufferings. Good or bad depends on the system, but the gamble can be very expensive and lasting indeed!.   

3) The heart and the humanity:-  When political parties compete, they compete to take over power. So, there will be nothing but international politics, national politics, party politics, power politics, nothing but political rhetoric and, of course, blaming each other for this or that. Party politicians are either too shy or afraid to talk about compassion and morality for fear to offend friends and voters, because nowadays it's gone too far and too late to find those stuff, even in priesthood! They either keep silent or leave those things to the legal departments, or simply charge everything under the big word "Freedom", as freedom also means none interference. So, in election, the political parties can't afford to present their candidates on qualities of the heart, on humanity, or on morality, and the voting grass roots are never afforded the chance to choose qualities of candidate they would like, because such so called democracy really means only two men and their running mates to vote for. In the end it's always a big State Governor, or an influential Senator who gets elected to be the national leader. 

However, in the above Hong Kong proposal, the outcome of election can be different, because the Electoral Committee can select qualities of candidate from a much wider range, apart from political parties. They are free to recognize top qualities from a vast field of choices, including district elected politicians, just as long as they do sufficiently and aptly represent differently Functional Constituencies of your national life as well as your own life. But what's more, if in the end, their choice turns out to be a failure, they would feel terribly responsible for it, because they are the chosen ones, specifically charged with the task and responsibility to find the best leader for all, and not the faceless mass of average or emotional voting public that may be conveniently used to shield off responsibility, or dramatized with the name "Universal Suffrage" or "One man one vote" when in truth only "One person in five" has voted or given his franchise.... It all boils down to this:- A national leadership is the leadership of not just politics and administration, but also an influence and example of wisdom, humanity and morality. Because we are all humans, and all normal humans enjoy and desire humane and harmonious relationship. Only a tiny percentage are power and blood thirsty. Imagine if the whole humanity admires and approves of your leader and his humanity, then how happy, proud, prosperous and secured you and your nation can be?           

4) Undesirable rhetoric:-  This new system completely eliminates (a) In the more advanced societies:-  The selfish party politics, the campaign rhetoric, the swaying, politicizing, the inflaming emotions, the personal attacks, the self glorification, and the drums and gongs of the make belief efforts, or alternatively the collusions between parties to rule the nation. (b) In the less advanced societies:-  The hooliganism, the coercions, the corruption, the behaviours of  thugs, hoods, gangsters that claim the rights to be selfish and to take over, and then allege to be on behalf of people, or of the street corner political agitators who aim to stir up trouble, riots and violence, and then in the end escalate to political bloodshed... There are no lack of such elements in many instable nations...  

5) Fool proof counting:- Such new electoral system makes it impossible to cheat or count wrong because the members of Electoral Committee are limited and votes can easily be recounted. 

6) Dangerous passion and emotions:- None partisan election minimizes the use of nationalism, patriotism and national defense or such dangerous public emotions, especially in times of war or international conflicts, which would otherwise almost always guarantee the re-election of a presently sitting national leader. Passions of patriotism can be good or dangerous. National emergencies can be created by mistake or by intent. Wars may be started or stopped, but once war starts, it simply would not stop until a total victory or defeat is finally evident. Wars, warranted or unwarranted, bring decades of unpredictable repercussions and ramifications, which may or may not be the personal concern or interest of a wrong leader whose qualities are not properly chosen. Wars in the 21st century would always escalate to unclear confrontations in the end...

7) Classified Representations:- The 21st century human society has become such a highly complex and technically specialized community, which is becoming even more so by the day. The meaning and purpose of people's political representation are in need of redefinition. For instance, what used to be the profession of Medical Doctor, or Engineer, is now sub-divided into tens of specialized categories. Each with a large and specialized field of knowledge, information as well as its own problems. District elected officers represent the common people and their problems or hopes of certain districts. Professionally elected or appointed members from Functional Constituencies represent people and problems of each professional sectors. They are all large groups of people's representatives, each with its specialized functions and purposes. A Functional Constituency has its own up to date information and proposals to contribute, which play a highly important role in the daily government operation. The only difference is that some are more importance than others, and some are more specialized than others, but they must be all be represented in order that all social organs may operate in unison, in orchestration and in a timely fashion. Some Functional Constituencies, such as food, education, finance, health and transport sectors, etc., can actually represent even more population than an electoral district and play a more specialized but vital role in the livelihood of the modern society. In short, as time goes on, specialization in governmental work will increase with the specialized needs and roles played by Functional Constituencies. A legislative organ and national electoral body consisting of different functional representatives must work in direct synchronization with modern reality, because the responsibility of a complete national life as well as international security, hence national legislation and the creation of most powerful (rather than the best possible) head of nation, is one that should not be conducted, nor dominated, by purely politics or politicians alone.  

However,  when the government pays salaries to the district elected officials and the cost to establish a contact office for each district, the primary purpose is to help government function with up to date information and policies making. Each and every particular problems or suggestions from the district should be carefully and clearly recorded with details for official reference, scrutiny and considerations. Care should be taken that tax payers' money is not used for building up size and influence, or private interests of political parties, or worse still, for frequent antigovernment activities, such as organization for large scale street demonstrations, or creating anti government sentiments, etc... District elected officers or legislators are part of the very positive infra-structure of the government. They are the officially paid government officials, and their office facilities are government facilities. Government officials and government facilities, paid by tax payers, should not be used to campaign for interests of political parties or to inflame negative influences (Of course, I presume that no proper government officials have done so!). However, if and when that should unfortunately happen, then the primary purposes of district election and publicly funded district office are lost, and the government will be left with only the officers from the Functional Constituencies to function with propriety and trust. 

 

In such a system, the Functional Constituencies then become the only meaningful agents of government and representation of people, and the government must work with them to safe guard the interest of state. Therefore, only such a system can make sure that people of all walks and professions are truly, impartially or evenly represented, and that tax payers' money are properly spent. That's why the system of Functional Constituencies in the legislature is so essential and should be greatly valued. Otherwise the entire legislature would be controlled by the self-interests of one or more partied or grouped politicians, in which case, eventually the entire national life could slowly turn into political rhetoric, political maneuver and political struggles. I have shown in the early part of this page a List of Principle Problems on Modern Democracy with 30 essential points, I then illustrated the problems with 34 actual examples under Examples of troubled democracy in recent time.   Power grabbing ambitions and selfish interests of polarizing political parties and party leaders destroy all the good things in democracy, and are the major cause for disputes, corruptions, demand for impeachments, power struggles, regional unrest or riots, arousing animosity among people and government, and sometimes, in some troubled or less developed countries, even civil wars... Like the 20 years civil wars in China..  

 

Let me hurry to emphasize here that the formation and existence of a political party has never been an issue here. The issue is what kind of political party, also the aim, the control and the conduct of a political party that may or may not polarize the nation. A party may be established to maximize its strength to serve the needs of people and nation in peace time, and to protect and defense them in war time. In such a party, rules are usually clear and strict, if the aim and conduct become selfish and corrupt, the party control center will often punish its degenerated elements quite severely in order to maintain and enforce the aim of service. Unfortunately, like a good sword with two shape edges, a party may also be established to maximize its strength with the aim to gain selfish ambition for rule or control, or to demand and extract its needs from the people or the nation. In such a party organization, because its aim is not broadened into services to the community, but focused on the self, once it gathers pace and strength, it becomes a force to be reckoned with. Others would want to stop it... That often leads violence or civil war... A political party is a good thing, only if its aims, purpose, internal rules and controls strictly mean services to the individual people and loyalty to the entity of state or nation, and that such aims are being demonstrated in their conducts and performances openly... That's why to prevent polarization of partied ambitions and excess in strength, the state administration and legislation, in space and nuclear age, should be shared by other qualified representatives of Functional Constituencies or professional guilds. That, in fact, would mean that the government administration has got down to maximized the use of actual business experiences, and minimized the sometimes inflammatory political rhetoric, thereby making a more practical yet harmonious society. So, what's wrong with that? And what harm can that do? 

8) Impeachment:- Without the party control and party loyalty, a failed or corrupted national leader can be effectively impeached by 2/3 majority of the Electoral Committee, thus eliminating harmful party loyalty, which destroys the effective purpose of impeachment, and therefore, the effectiveness of democracy. 

9) Rationality, peace and harmony:- The new electoral system is much more sensible, rational, peaceful and harmonious, compared with the competition, damaging struggles and often violence of political parties, due to the none confrontational nature and the unified aim of election by the Electoral Committee in the common interests of the entire nation instead of political parties' self interests. The Chinese civilization had practiced some 13 centuries of true and harmonious democracy under the "Exam Raised" system when all government officials were qualified impartially and scientifically by scholastic exams. Obviously this was Democracy in its truest, most qualitative and most productive expression. No other political systems in the world and in history have had the actual and extensive experience or the need to show Chinese people what democracy should be like. In fact, in the "Exam Raised" system the officials elected themselves into the government by passing the exams. Not only such democracy was sensible, rational, peaceful and harmonious, it was free of troubles, of complaints and of confrontations between parties. What's more, for 2500 Confucian philosophy had taught the principles of both national and global democracy with unselfish goal and, in particular, with harmony. Thus a harmonious and rational approach to democracy is in the Chinese blood and Chinese memory. Besides, the present Central Government has recently launched a nation wide policy to build a harmonious society.

10) Trust and faith:-  In many problematic nations, due to tribal divisions, economic and social unrest and general under developments, the task of a trusted chosen Electoral Committee from the best, respected and most rational members of society not only eliminates the doubts, the distrust between parties or tribes, but also the mistakes of election, resulting in loss of faith to the electoral process, or resulting in the wrong choice of national leadership. Instead, the new system produces an all round fair, smooth, harmonious, democratic, intelligent, trustworthy and trouble free process of election. 

11) Thinking for nation and for all:- Under the improved system the most intelligent, responsible and mature members of society are collectively and selectively used as electorate to make quality choice of  national leadership, not only for the legitimate voters, but also for the enfant, the under or over aged, the sick, the legally disqualified and the absentees who are unable to vote, as well as the poor and illiterate. It extends democracy and its true purpose of democracy to an unprecedented scope and reach. The human society must always be guided and led only by quality of the brain and heart, not by the gut, or the muscles, or by the mouth using words, rhetoric or oratory. In fact, the qualities of brain and heart are far more superior than the stipulations of perfunctory laws. 

12) Violence and bloodshed:- The new system could eliminate the national turmoil, the riots, violence, bloodsheds created by fighting political parties before, during and after the election, which are regular happenings in so many nations that require United Nations to send troops to keep peace.

13) Stability in national policies:- Under this new system, having eliminated the diversification and flip-flop change of party policies, party will, party interests and accumulated massive party power and tradition, the major national and foreign policies will be more streamlined, more continuous, more directional and therefore more stable. The elected leader would not be subject to party influence, hence free to act in the interest of the state and the people. An irrational and misguided politician, e.g. the likes of Hitler, would not be able to use the massive party power to become a relentless dictator. And yet by increasing and strengthening the team of his personal staff commensurate to his responsibility, the elected leader will be able to perform most efficiently and effectively. 

14) Checking mechanisms:  In the Western style Democracy, where election is controlled and driven by the massive will and interest of oppositional political parties, which then persuade or entice a sea of faceless public to elect their own Party selected electoral candidate. They call the system also as the "Universal Suffrage" and peoples are led to believe that they are enjoying "One man, one vote", when in fact, in any average term of elections, only about 20% of citizens end up in casting votes for the winning candidate [Please read item # 15 "Voter's Turn Out" and item # 16 Overall Mandate" under my List of Principle Problems on Modern Democracy in the early part of this page. ]. This means that in reality always, yes always, the absolute tiny minority would finish up in ruling the vast absolute majority. In truth, it is "One man in Five votes" and not "One man, one vote" that controls the fate of entire nation. On top of that, the candidate is chosen and fixed by political parties and not by the people. This is the reason that in many nations a certain section of the population has never or almost never any hope to win the election. In fact, in some cases, it is the One Man's Right or One single man's special privilege (the elected leader) to veto down the majority decisions of an entire Nation or the entire Assembly of Peoples' Representatives, i.e. the Congress, especially when the such decisions are aimed to restrain that same leader's ambitions. That is to say, a candidate fixed by political parties with unpredictable qualities and ambitions, if and when he is elected, he can always veto away or simply ignore any decisions made by National People's Representatives, or people's wishes, if he doesn't like those decisions personally. In which case, because he is backed up by his party, people can do nothing about it. In such a system, people are made to believe or to appear as if they have the right of control, but in truth, only two parties control everything. In advanced nations, the two parties collude and would never offend voters to avoid losing votes, allowing all sort of social injustices, immoralities, drugs and random murders to take over national life. In less advanced nations, parties collide, giving unashamed or open corruptions and of course violent bloodshed. In the one way or the other, the poor people can only watch, while News medias love it! 

Democracy, in its true and pure literally sense, is a very alluring, persuasive and heart warming term. Unfortunately many so called "Democracies" are not "true" democracies. The so called "Universal Suffrage" is not "true" universal Suffrage, and its "One man one vote" is not "true" one man one vote. Nationally, such untruth provides space for ambitious politicians to turn people's power into party power. Internationally it provides space for such party power and patriotism to initiate wars, such as the World War II. A so called democratically elected Head of Nation could sometimes or always be elected by only 1/5 of the population and then turn into a One Man Absolute Power when he/she has the personal rights to veto the national decisions made by People's Congress and the Senate, even by national election. He/she is also entitled to reject and over turn the verdicts of a Court of Justice and the Jury for the crimes committed by his/her personal friends or colleagues. Under such circumstances this democratically elected Head could and would insist on continuation of war and invasion engineered by him/her without proper cause. He/she could also order further build up of direct military threat on nations that might retaliate his/his plans, despite the fact that his/her nation is already by far the dominating single Super Power. In fact, under that overly glorified Democracy and its justification to impose ones own political system or ones own way of life on others, its none stop built up of military might and threat, plus its leader's relentless will power and privilege, such democratically elected Head could single handedly start, continue and prolong any military invasion or domination on any nations of the world. Sooner or later such democracy would have to become the overture of the World War III, involving the rest of mankind. 

Such outcome of democracy would all begin with the harmless competitions between political parties and the eventual formation of two large and powerful parties of equal strength, giving no chance to smaller parties. In the end, only about 20% of population will rule over the rest of nation. Consequently it is not essential whether the voters have the rights to vote or not that counts. What really counts is whether or not the voters are able to vote for the best qualified choice for the sake of all the people, for the safety and prosperity of the nation and for the justified peace of the globe in which people must live and work, and not just for the interests and power of political parties. Competition between parties intrinsically contains energies and nature of strife and conflict, which would soon displace the harmony and true hope of democracy or any well intended political systems. Competition seldom, in fact never, compete for moral attainment or philosophical wisdom and concord. Morality and philosophy are products of experience and learning from millenniums of human civilization. They are crystallized slowly through culture and cultivation of lessons learned  in private and social life. Now the rise and demands for random freedom of desire and immorality are breaking down such precious human heritage. Without proper moral awareness, in time, national goal would be veiled only in clever political rhetoric, in untruth, in inhumanity and violence, causing crimes, drug cartels, revenge or random killing to rise and becoming a daily reality. Democracy as such then becomes the breeding ground, the cause and the energy for crime, strife, unrest, open corruptions, violent conflicts and bloodshed in many less developed regions of the world, far removed from the peace and satisfaction as it is supposed to bring! And in other regions, powerful political parties are forced to collude with each other and with the voting public in order to continue their rule. Collusion silently allows injustices, crimes, social ills and violence to continue and escalate under world wide auspices. If the situation worsens or expands, the system will evolve to bring about dangers and complications of nuclear arm race in the world! Because a political system, or any form of social belief, cannot afford to be indulged in competition for power alone, any system that corrupts its true course and quest for social concord and equality, will eventually corrupt in violence....     

Therefore, it is high time that the real purpose and the realistic slogans or terminologies for Democracy and for Election should be thoroughly discussed and re-examined before all nations on earth proceed to the future elections in order to build a safer world in the nuclear 21st century, and before all citizens endows the system with propriety and righteousness. In short, it is high time that people all over the world should rise to start talking and thinking of  an improved way to select a national leader who may represent, not only the ambitions and desires of the politically powerful party bosses, but also the humanity and hope of the young and old members of the nation. Because the system can be dangerous and has no effective means and measures to check or predict the qualities and performance, nor the hidden undesirable personal traits of an elected leader, without which such elected leader could turn into an obstinate dictator to cause prolonged or unpredictable human atrocities or conflicts for the people of the nation and other nations (Hitler did it). What's more, such leaders cannot be impeached since national sentiments and party loyalty would not permit sufficient votes for effective impeachments. Unless the historic Chinese system of raising governmental authorities by exams be reinstalled, there is no mechanism to check the qualities of a political leader. The present Hong Kong system of electing the state leader by a large electoral body, consisting of most experienced and most qualified electors, and a legislative body, consisting of the best qualified leaders of various Functional Constituencies make sure that there will be no nasty surprises in the eventual selection of leadership, and that it is possible to remove, impeach or alter the personal will power of that state leadership, if needed... I write this not just to remind and alarm Hong Kong people, but also for people of all nations...     

15) Universal suffrage:- After the Electoral Committee has done its work, a final universal suffrage can be optionally proposed to give the public the same chance to elect either a single final leader or two leaders ( a leader and a deputy leader). I say "optionally" because due to too many overwhelming and practical reasons Hong Kong can only be a partial autonomy under the care and protection of her motherland China. It is also obvious that Western style democracy, based on confrontational political parties, is totally unsuitable for Chinese people, because, as already explained the Chinese people have already known well and lived through 1300 years of true, peaceful and harmonious democracy. It is unimaginable that Chinese people would want to change it with civil wars again! The Chinese :Exam Raised" democracy was the only effectively proven democracy the world has ever known that for 13 centuries never caused conflicts, disputes or unrests, but sadly it was destroyed beyond repair by the political slogans and implementation of the first Western style democracy under Chiang Kai Sek who then initiated 20 years of civil war. The memories are still fresh to millions. Now, under the above suggested new system, there is no selfish power grabbing struggles of political parties. The idea of a universal suffrage without political parties is hence closer to the tradition of Chinese democratic principles. Only the decision must be made completely by the Central Government in Beijing, who would also decide the timing and approve the system of operation. However, if those admirers of Western style democracy are so nuts about voting to choose one leader out of two candidates, perhaps Beijing may be persuade to satisfy their selfish whim by staging a similar universal suffrage under the suggested new system, for after all there is no difference as far as voters are concerned... But this must be an optional device, which I shall explain in the upcoming special note.

16) National security:- This new system also stops the possibility for a hostile nation to make use or support one party against another, and turn the subject nation into a battle field. Although I say it's a possibility, and of course when it happens, no perpetrators would ever admit, but if scrutinized carefully, the possibility is very real indeed. In many civil wars, past or present, behind them there is often a foreign hand in it, such as using external support with political rhetoric and News medias or sales of weapons. Sales or acquisition of weapons to or from foreign sources is a direct promotion of war efforts and direct threat to national or regional peace and security. Therefore precaution is both important and necessary, but without national divisions or massive parties in confrontation it cannot be done, certainly not so easily and massively.

17) A better future world:-  In the end, this new system paths the way for an unselfish and harmonious society as well as an intelligent, peaceful and truly democratic world to safeguard international peace and rationality in the growing nuclear civilization... The future and hope of mankind, as well as the true Prevention of Nuclear Confrontation can be better protected by the sheer quality of leaders. In fact, human civilization can only be built by the principles, the philosophy and the crystallization of the human mind and heart, then put into intelligent and humanitarian applications, and not by the superstitious beliefs, nor only by the rules and stipulations of international treaties. The humans society must come to terms with such intelligent and qualitative evolution in the 21st century.

18) Seats of legislature:-  The above principles of widened democracy are for election of the Head or Heads of the government. But the same principles should also apply to the election for the body of legislature. The exact structure and function of the body of legislature, just as other specific parts of the Constitution, varies almost in every country, although its primary responsibility is to make laws. It is also for that specific reason the seats of legislature should not be monopolized by members who have come through district elections alone. The law making process, and therefore seats of legislature, should be shared by a cross section of responsible representatives from different vital sectors of the community, and here again, should be commensurate to their experience, qualification, achievement and importance, in order to ensure the quality of legislative output and the needs of a space age society. In particular, the function of legislature should be designed in cooperation and in phase with the Executive and the Judicial departments of the government. Strictly speaking, the successful candidates of district election only represent the voice behind the numbers of votes they get (often just a couple of thousand votes), they have not been given the true and absolute rights to represent the voice of the entire Hong Kong people. Or in reality, they cannot even represent the votes that are not cast for them, or those cast against them. In normal practice, elected legislators are considered to have won election by "Plurality" (relatively more votes than other single contestants) and not by "Majority" (over 50% of total votes) to represent their own district only. But the voice of other vital sectors (especially business and industries sectors who should not be elbowed to the wrong end of legislation) often represent more than a few thousand concerned lives, and therefore should also be included in law making decisions. In short, a balance should be achieved to guarantee the rights and vitality of all important sectors in accordance to their role and  importance in the community. One solution to the situation is to keep the status quo, and allow the well tested present Hong Kong legislative system to continue its proven positive work. Alterations for an already working system require serious considerations, consultations, enough public consensus, gradual change, experimentations and finally rectifications. All of that needs time. 

[Special note:- The definition of universal suffrage differs from nation to nation. Although above mentioned optional measure of universal suffrage does give the same chance for the folks to get hands wet in voting, citizens should also ask deep in their conscience what is the ultimate objective of any national election in the first place? There is a conflict between the individual rights and the overall rights of a nation or of an entire people. There is also the conflict between the rights of a citizen and the duties of a citizen. Therefore it becomes necessary to ask : Is it more important to elect the best leader for the entire nation and all the people, or is it more important to argue about ones own rights and elect ones own party boss? The nation and all the people have the rights to elect through most impartial means the best possible leader for the best possible future for everybody as a whole, which is free of party struggles, sudden change of national policies (for instance one party may advocate peace, while another might choose war), and sometimes extreme violence in trying to grab power (Sometimes some would refer to clash or violence, even bloodshed as "competition"). At the same time, the nation and its people have also the rights to refuse the will, the demand and the amassed power of any specific party or parties. The individual citizen can represent himself or herself, the party can represent its group, but the government cannot represent an individual or a group, it must represent the whole nation and the entire people. When the conflict between rights and duties arises the government, Central and/or Local, must act resolutely for the best of all.  

 

Now, comparing the following; 1) what the parties and their bosses can achieve for the nation by trying to grab power for themselves (although they always claim they are doing for the people) and only one party gets it, and 2) what a universal suffrage can achieve by getting a mixed or average decision from a sea of faceless voters who have neither ideas, nor experience in the increasing complexity of national administration and international struggles, and 3) lastly what the Electoral Committee is entrusted to do for the nation, with their qualified and proven capacities of up to date knowledge, responsibility, experience and impartiality...  Now, if out of the 3 choices one can come up with the best result for the entire nation, then obviously that is also the best choice. That is to say, if the Electoral Committee can come up with the best outcome or more fair, intelligent, responsible and more unselfish decisions to elect the best leader for all people, including the babies, the under aged voters, the old and sick, the poor, the illiterate, the disqualified, the parties and their voters (including the "would be defeated" voters), and the absentees who cannot vote and cannot be present to speak out for themselves, but all have the rights to live under the best possible national leadership and government, then the Electoral Committee's work should be respected as the best for all. This should be obvious, because high quality electorates are expected to produce quality decisions, and therefore quality elected leader, and none-partisan electorates will give none-partisan results. That's why human society will always choose to be led by solid quality of leaders, not by flowery speeches or empty promises. [Yes, even for the babies, some responsible and caring elders would have to think for them and protect them, at least against slippery politicians, political turmoil, or turmoil agitators, and possible civil wars or possibly against wrong leaders who would randomly start wars.]

 

Please note, in many nations of Western democracy, such as the USA, the votes for the winning candidate of election are actually cast by only roughly 20%, or less, of the total population [ see early in this page List of Problems on Democracy, item # 16) "Overall Mandate"], the vast majority 80% people, who do not or cannot vote for the winner, still deserves every rights to live under the best possible leadership and government. Their hopes and aspirations are not the concern of the partisan voters who want to win the election for their party boss, nor can it be achieved by a universal suffrage, since universal suffrage cannot include all those who are not present to vote. Therefore, only a highly qualified, responsible, democratic and fair Electoral Committee can be entrusted with the responsibility to think for all and for the nation as a whole. In which case, this proposed motion of universal suffrage should be considered optional, and perhaps redundant. Because the true morale of election is to seek the best future for the nation and for all, not for an individual or those party activists to grab power or to turn the nation into battle field of words or civil war, which is what party struggles by nature and by definition would do.... 

 

Now, since the vote or the decision of an individual or his party is none but private or selfishly orientated, and the overall decision and judgment resulting from universal suffrage is in fact a mixed average of intelligence, of will and of desire regardless of the interest of the national entity, therefore, the decision by the Electoral Committee made of the most intelligent and most responsible members of community must be far better than average and hence the best choice! If that is the case, then the measure of universal suffrage is not only optional, but effectively redundant and should really be scrubbed. But in the case of Hong Kong, the decision must be made by the Chinese Central Government because Hong Kong is a integral of the Chinese nation, although it may be treated as a Province or a State (like the US States) with partial autonomy, the Central Government must be ultimately responsible to decide impartially for the future of Hong Kong as well as for the entire Chinese nation, and because it is also the senior authority of Hong Kong, and also because the present Basic Law is the representation of will and decision of over 1.3 billion Chinese nationals delegated to the People's Congress. For that reason the People's Congress, if necessary, has the power to amend any methods or schedule for the election in Hong Kong, as well as any part of the national Constitution. It is obvious, the "One Country Two Systems" can only work harmoniously, if the "Two Systems" operate within the framework and principle of "One Country". Meanwhile, any other measures that are even slightly less than perfect or not possibly any better, their supporters would have no legal rights, nor political logics, nor moral grounds to stand on and to insist.... 

 

Although in the above analysis I have suggested that the choice for the optional implementation of  universal suffrage be left to the authority of Chinese Central Government and to the national decision reached in the People's Congress by the entire Chinese people as well as to the regional consensus yet to be decided and finalized by the Hong Kong people, I must add that I myself do not and cannot encourage the practice of universal suffrage. The reason is simple! If I am a member of a large family and the family needs a leader, I shall leave the decision and choice of leader to the wisest, the best educated, the most experienced and the most trustworthy uncles and aunties in the family. Especially if the chosen leader has to make vital decisions for a large and competitive family business, and especially if I am not well versed in business matters, or perhaps I am not well educated, or perhaps I am even illiterate. I may have the inherited rights for my share of the family business, but I certainly will not allow myself or any unqualified person to run the business. In fact, I have no right to lower the quality of business decision by fighting for the rights to participate in the decision making... It is for this simple reason that the result of universal suffrage is at great disadvantage, if not fatal, in the highly advanced and dangerous international politics where treacherous schemes of aggressions, power struggles and bloodshed are daily business. It is especially unwise, even dangerous, for the nations or states that have a larger population of uneducated or illiterate people. I for one will never encourage that the quality of my national leadership be lowered to endanger my nation or my people in the increasingly dangerous nuclear weapon world. The more advanced modern technology of wars, or of global politics, or of national administration becomes, the more advanced or specialized national leadership must be. The day will yet come when national leadership will be consisted of multi-layers of specializations, each requiring nothing but the best and the highest quality of leadership, far beyond the visions and understandings of the sea of ordinary or average citizens.      

 

In conclusion, a nation's future does not belong to a party or any partisan who claims to speak for all the people, because any Toms and Dicks can also claim and shout  to speak for all the people. Any orator can claim to speak for the poor, even when the speaker belongs to the privileged class. But in truth they do not and cannot! In fact, no self interested individuals or political parties can honestly speak for all the people, or claim to do good for the sea of faceless public. It's only natural that people have conflict of interest, but only those who do not represent a self-interest fighting group or a political party, such as the non-partisan members of the Electoral Committee, or the National Central Government and The People's Congress, are empowered  and truly free from self interests or unbiased to think and act for the nationhood and for those who have no political voice, and for those reasons their decisions are respected. ... This basic principle and understanding must be the aim of democracy, the hope of nations and future of mankind, especially in the coming full-blown age of nuclear technology...

[ In the United States there is a nightly CBS "Talk Show" hosted by David Letterman, now also shown in Hong Kong under ATV World channel. It displays already over half a year the nightly speech by the former President John F. Kennedy saying "Ask not what your country can do for you! Ask what you can do for your country!"... Such persistent nightly exertion of politics is obviously not the personal interest of a "Talk Show" host, but some politician's clever use of entertainment to inject national sentiments. This nightly call came during the days of HK election when government paid officials marched against the government. Some district elected legislators demanded that seats of Functional Constituencies to be scrubbed and the entire legislature be replaced by their own kind. They want the newly widened and improved democratic electoral system of Hong Kong established by Basic Law be stopped and replaced with their own ideas. Ironically these publicly paid civil servants are more interested in building up strength and control of their own political parties in the future government than how to build a harmonious society led by quality leadership elected by quality electors. They call the election by the Hong Kong's Electoral Committee (800 members), which is bigger than the United State Electoral College (538 members) a "Small Circle Election"...   

 

Ironically, it also appears President Kennedy is reminding Hong Kong people nightly not to demand this and that, or ask for this and that personal rights, but to ask what is your own duty to the community, and then ask what you can do to help building a democratic and harmonious state. You see, where the principle for democracy is concerned, the Chinese people are special! Because since Tang dynasty for over 1300 years, Chinese ancestors, Chinese sages, Chinese civilization had long realized the dangers and violence of party and partisan politics in national life. They knew that simple definition of "rights" is too mechanical and people are not machines. Chinese civilization knew that people are rational, intelligent and philosophic, so they practiced democracy by impartial "exams". And because of that, for 13 centuries there was no trace of slavery in China, no inhuman governments and no political violence, as government officials elected all by themselves through exams. Therefore, in Chinese history there was no known organized demand for "Human Rights" from the grass roots, because there was never any need for it. There was only social obligations and Confucius teaching of human relationship and humanitarian philosophy. Imagine what a beautifully democratic and harmonious society China was!

 

In short, the Chinese social order was never based on perfunctory laws or mechanical rights (but what some modern legal minds are trained to understand is the famous "rights"! Just some! However, one Chinese sage, Confucius, knew well that between the "rights" and "wrongs" stands humanity, and he successfully taught Chinese people how to think and behave like a human being ). The Chinese civilization has always been, and still is, desirous of  rationality, philosophy, humanity and harmony. That's why Chinese historical people detested violence and invasions. Soldiers were ranked the last in the 5 social classes (These classes were intellectuals, farmers, labourers, traders and soldiers, according to their social importance). Such history proves that it was possible to enjoy democracy in peace and harmony, and under Chinese historical principles of democracy, there was no wars, nor civil wars. Today, Chinese diplomats are helping to negotiate peace and nuclear prevention in North Korea. The Chinese government is working hard to spread peace and harmony among nations. Today, hundreds of millions of previously poor farmer and rural folks are rejoicing improved living conditions and enhanced freedom (By "enhanced freedom" I mean freedom with concern for humanitarian considerations and a tinge of state's interests.). Yet, in some parts of the world infrequent habitual verbal defamation and attacks continue. Only the traditionally none violent and democratically as well as philosophically matured Chinese people lightly brush them aside with a smile....    

 

Today, violence has brought humanity to the brink of self destruction and yet, the world has still no idea of how important those ancient Chinese characteristics could mean to the future of mankind! So, I do think Kennedy is right! Ask not what your country can do for you! Ask what you can do for your country! If it is possible, in the mainland, for party members to unselfishly to march in front and lead the rest of nation to bear one child only, regardless of boy or girl, in order to give the next generation a less crowded and more resourceful country, then it is possible, here in Hong Kong, for people to reflect how to help building a harmonious home with intelligence and quality leadership, instead of relentless demands and pressures on the government to adopt those untrue and make belief political systems that are remnants and derivatives of slavery and colonialism. And it would also be possible to appreciate and preserve those precious values of Chinese humanistic democracy originated from Confucian philosophy and Exam Raised system, which had given China that harmonious, contented, cultural and democratic history for over two millenniums.... In my view, such precious heritage should be highly valued, glorified and spread in full exposure for the benefit of mankind in this dangerous nuclear weapon age!

 

Actually in all human communities, whenever individual interests and the interests of a whole race or the nation come into conflict, there has never been exceptions, the individual always gives in to the state. Even a President must do that. It is only right to do so, because for each right of a citizen, there is also a duty to the State.... Democracy can be effected in peace and harmony, like the Chinese ancestors had done it, and Hong Kong is showing the world with her own new system, or democracy can mean war and civil war, like what is happening in Iraq. While today (18th March 2007) a couple of thousand activists marched in Hong Kong to demand full Western democracy in 2012, yet ironically, in this very same day hundreds of thousands, perhaps a million or two, also took to the street in Washington and other cities across the US, also in South America, Europe, Middle East, Asia, all calling the Bush administration to stop what he is doing, i.e. implanting democracy causing civil war in Iraq...  Four years ago, tens of thousands Iraqis had been led to believe that democracy was best thing for them. Now millions and millions regret it has ever happened. Over 0.6 million people have already died in civil war and some 3.7 millions have fled Iraq. I wonder if Hong Kong people are learning anything at all?

 

Even I have come to my senses! In 1989 I wrote to Deng Xiao Ping in praise of democracy. Now I can see that the new Hong Kong system is only the beginning too the right answer for democracy in the 21st century nuclear world. I have also now come to realize the true wisdom and value of the Chinese "Exam Raised" democracy. That's why I have now exposed here in this website those letters to Mr. Deng, which covered both the Tien An Men incident as well as the wars and civil wars in Gaza and the Gulf that have troubled millions for so many decades, and now the threat of nuclear arms race is looming. That's also why I have illustrated here in such details what confrontational democracy can do to human families and human societies. It is not important when and how people come to their senses, it's important enough though that they do come to their senses before it's too late, too late to stop aggressions, invasions, civil wars, and finally nuclear confrontations. Unfortunately it came too late for Saddam Hussein, who pleaded for Iraqi people to forgive each other before he was hung in Nov 2006. This is also why sometimes a wise central government or responsible leader must act humanely, decisively, resolutely and quickly on behalf of history, of the race, of the nation and for the future of the whole people.

 

It all boils down to this:- Chinese people and Hong Kong people are in luck! Because they are both fortunate enough to begin building their new national political civilization right at the start of the 21st century but with full view of human history, past and present. I mentioned in my letter to Deng in 1989 that China needed 20 to 40 years to construct a fully effective legal system, and now Hong Kong is committed to complete the Basic Law for her own future. That puts both China and Hong Kong in the construction business right at the opening of  the brand new 21st century, not only with full view of success of the Chinese internal history, but also with full reference of the bloodshed and cruelty in the external human societies during the last several centuries. However, all that is possible, only if national defense is sufficient and technically advanced. But the most important of all is that national leadership must be strong, visionary, wise and willing to self sacrifice. Yet even that would not be enough! The greatest thing of all is that the entire Chinese people behave unselfishly and understand the value of quality leadership, as well as the aspiration of a harmonious society and Democracy... ]

I have repeatedly referred to "Nuclear Age" because sooner or later there must come a time when actions of individual nations affect the life and function of the globe or the entire mankind, such as Global Warming or nuclear technology, or wars and invasions, then all previous principles and philosophy governing world politics (even national politics, such as the purpose of democracy) must surface timely and repeatedly for major revisions and readjustments... Perhaps that time has already come! If it has! Then humans are to be congratulated, because this time, at last, it becomes possible that change may be effected through intelligence and rational discussions, such as this writing, and not major world war...   

The above 18 reasons should be plenty enough, although there are more! But even if there is only one reason alone, it is already important enough to warrant serious considerations... However, by this writing I am not making any demands whatsoever on my part. This writing is only meant to serve as reference materials only... The reason that so many functional sectors of the society should be involved in electing the leader is that national life should not be decided only by some politicians who sprint to power through political party hierarchy or party campaigns, and such electoral campaigns are often just a lot of political rhetoric. Functional sectors of a society are the actual functioning organs of a whole national life, just as the human body needs the head, the heart, the blood, lung, the liver, etc., to live and function. They should all function together and take part in national decisions. These functional sectors not only represent greater and truer meaning of democracy, as the inclusion of business, technical and other intellectual sectors into decision making process increases contact, discussions and awareness of economic, political and intellectual exchanges as well as the atmosphere of consensus and support of national and communal life, and because the quality of a national leadership affects them all. As a result the mistakes of wars and political aggressions could be minimized, and the national defense more rational and unified, while peace and national harmony will be strengthened. [Note: After some years of experimentation of such an improved democracy, if results are not ideal, then the old Chinese system of examination may also be experimented using the schools and universities as halls of examination, because the "Exam Raised" system had proven its success for 13 centuries, by giving rationality, peace, harmony and consensus to Chinese cultural and political life..... ]

This atmosphere would dampen and lessen the political strives and provocative arguments that come often with  party politics or party interests, which would produce national leadership for party interests only. The diminished power of political parties will in turn force the party politicians to come up with practical and constructive contributions to national affairs. The stability and complete structure of a national life depends on all national organs to function and coordinate well together, and to communicate as a whole, just like a healthy body that has no disagreeable organs in it. When that become possible, it will stream line steady political directions, economic prosperity and national harmony. Actually the present status quo in Hong Kong is the result of 10 years experiment and fore runner of the above proposed system, though still not fully and constitutionally recognized. But it has already given Hong Kong a smooth transition of sovereignty, because the change of sovereignty is a huge historical change, and such a great change without serious hitch is mainly due to stability of political administration, cultural heritage as well as the rationality and the maturity of the people. 

Now Hong Kong has now successfully recovered its economy, and it is working well with the system in mainland China. In fact, it has a much more flexible, practical minded and none confrontational political system, compared with many troubled spots in the Asian neighbourhood. It inherits the best merits of the colonial era and is now heading for more improvement and greater cooperation with mainland counter parts in very way. I am sure not only most Hong Kong people are happy with the present reality and the expected progress. I am also sure that every foreign business investors and visitors in Hong Kong would not want to change it. So why should any one insist to turn it upside down? Why should Hong Kong tax payers pay politicians to turn the streets into marching field for their own political ambitions and political struggles, or to act like hooligans?    

Under such new electoral system, which consists of best quality electorates, not only the best quality of leadership will be elected in full view of the public, but the body of electorates has to bear certain responsibility for the decisions they make. In other words, the national mandate is not given by a faceless public (Note:- An ancient ruler charged the cause and consequence of his mandate to the account of a faceless God, and modern rulers charge the cause and consequence to the excuses to democratic mandate, behind which is a faceless and unrecognizable public who cannot be accounted for any responsibility because they vote for not just one party but all parties). Unlike the party controlled Western system, this new system cannot experience massively divided party energies and strives, excessive competitions, frauds between political parties. Being free of fluctuating policies engendered by alternating party rules the national life and foreign policies will become more cumulative and stream lined as time passes. In time national and international respect and reputation will increase. The above listed more than 30 faults and frauds in the world of Western style  democracy, or the party confrontation based democracy, may be completely avoided. Any other parties orientated defects, etc., and their related implications are also minimized. The national policy can indeed become a time honoured nationally and globally trusted and respected policy. 

All civilized humans desire and rejoice peace, happiness, stability, harmony and prosperity, but unfortunately, two basic obstacles have prevented the evolution of human nature and human society to advance in the desired direction. They are the partied or grouped excess of energy that causes aggression, and the love of bloodshed and wars, both are originated from primitive nature when humans had to compete for survival with animals. Now, humans have acquired the capacities to make any animal specie extinct. The humans have also acquired the capacity to destroy the globe of earth. In fact, the humans have now the capacity to destroy themselves. Unfortunately traces of the original rawness, or rather the barbaric nature remain still active, which should have long disappeared since the invention of agriculture, yet no politicians, nor leaders of human nations, are thinking where they are leading us to, or what is the fundamental problem that retards the advance of human nature. While natural scientists and humanitarians are trying to save some animal species, the political leaders are thinking how to make bigger bombs, or sent more troops, or how to grab the bigger piece of land. People of the world need to wake up and open their eyes, not just to see what's going on, where we are doing, but also what had happened in the past, and what would become of the future, even the near future within the 21st century. And then think of what to do about our distant future, especially about the massive suicide we are about to commit. So, at least let's get the political systems right that is so strong, herding and forcing those vulnerable and powerless individual humans towards mutual destruction. At this junction of civilization, it is also time to clean up all the make belief stuff that has misled the real feelings in human hearts and obstructed our clear visions... 

Of course, the present political party controlled Western style democracies have been passed down the history and evolved since long ago into a huge and irresistible system, especially under the massive propaganda through the media. The above proposal is a brand new proposal. In fact, it would be the first in the world. It's going to need time to smooth off the corners. Each political party has its own organization, its support team, its human power base and established resources. Each time a government changes hands from one political party to an opposition party, thousands of operatives' life would be changed with it.  The bigger the nation is, the more operatives are needed. Changing party control of government meaning some party members would get the chance to run the nation or even get rich, opposition party members would lose their control, their jobs and life support. This would happen once every few years. Such tradition in some countries is also of course a reason for instability, corruption, violence and unnecessary obstruction of normal life. However, if you remove the party controls and develop a truly new democratic system, this flip flop change, this past traditions and the entire manpower infrastructure will in time evolve with regularity and certainty. And such regularity will prevent loss of income and loss of experienced manpower, also the possibility of corruption, and of course improve quality and performance of civil service, resulting in  peace and harmony in the nation. It also goes without saying, any such major and fundamental change should be carefully built and the system must gain experience step by step. 

On the other hand, if the government operatives are not changed, following the change of political party after election, it would mean that in actual fact, the parties have colluded together to rule the nation. Such a system gives people false impression of democracy, or the false possibility for voters to change the direction of their nation, instead, they have no choice but to live always under the same parties, the same operatives and the same colluded conditions. No matter what the voters vote, nothing or nothing much is going to change. So again democracy is just a mean to rule by collusion. That's why the major issues, such as females or ethnic minority are never elected as national leaders, and there are many more basic problems, which have never moved forwards. In that case, it might as well be without political parties as suggested above. and allow the selective intelligent and best qualified electorates decide the fate the of nation and the world. Our world is becoming more and more integrated everyday. Now with the serious problems of global warming, nuclear technology will eventually be spread to all nations soon and the space technology is advancing just fine, even the structure and function of the universe are being revealed in this website, the humans are perfectly capable to live in the underground of Mars even now. If the human leaders are able to come to their proper senses, then in the foreseeable future our world become a global nation of mankind! Unless one, or all three, of ticking nuclear time bombs described here explodes. 

Yet as it happens these days, almost ever month some nations of democracy are in violent disputes, and lives are lost. As I am writing there are some half dozen nations of democracy in trouble. In Iraq the implantation of democracy turns out to be implantation of civil war. Over half a million lives are lost and 3.7 million Iraqi have fled their land, yet bigger forces are about to add on. It shows everywhere that members of a bi-party democracy with bi-party Congress or bi-party Parliament are more concerned about their own interests than national interests. So if you take their party interests away, they would have to concentrate on national interests and other human interests...   

Now let me say a few words about Hog Kong and for Hong Kong people only. In the case of Hong Kong, because only in 1997 she was still a British colony and because historically she had grown from a village to a town and then into a metropolis, the power grabbing political parties system had never existed under the British rule (thanks to Britain). Therefore the tradition and infrastructure of the system was not built for confrontation or competition of political parties and changing party controls. And yet Hong Kong has proven to be politically stable and economically successful through many decades of enormous changes and great tests, such as two huge Chinese revolutions, two World Wars and a Cold War occurring around her, and then finally her own change of sovereignty recently. Yet she has emerged to become an influential and affluent entity of the world.  If Hong Kong is to remain a liberal, peaceful, progressive and prosperous economic community as she is known all over the world, then she should continue her present developments and status quo, based on such social stability and political traditions, which is to say, without the wrong impression of the name "democracy", or rather without those power grabbing political parties. Instead, she should persist to develop and improve towards the true democracy as suggested here. If someday her rule of land should fall into the hands of those confrontational political parties and the parties would want to change their own policies and operatives, then it would plunge the present stable tradition as well as the peace and economic well being of Hong Kong into violent chaos, and all peace, harmony and her reputation a the number on free economy in the world will be quickly destroyed! 

 

There is another important fact that should always be born in mind. Both China and Britain are rich in traditions and believe in traditions. In other words, both their people love traditional stability in political and cultural life. The British are known through out the world to be conservative people, and in Chinese history, dynasties only changed when emperors had become totally corrupt or immoral, which occurred only once in many centuries. Actually come to think of it, what peoples in the world do not love traditions, political stability and economic security? Recently there has been a noisy protest locally about pulling down an old Star Ferry clock tower and Hong Kong Government immediately responded by reserving a large number of old buildings for preservation as historic cites. This reflects that both the people and government are tradition loving. Tradition believers do not like high pitch noise calling for irresponsible change. Besides, there are still plenty of British people living and working in Hong Kong, who would want to value the Hong Kong political tradition and legacy. 

 

However, there are a few radicals who seem to be dazed by the timely flickers in the world to think that the moon is brighter elsewhere than at home? Fortunately, they are only few, because they are always the few familiar faces that are demanding this or blaming that! They have managed to sway some one percents of excited Hong Kong population to play their drums and gongs and march with them. Even then, half of them had joined in just for the fun. It shows that the Hong Kong Chinese people, who have gone through so much huge changes as well as World Wars and civil wars, have long learned to value traditions, harmony, peace and social stability even more! And for the same reasons they have also become extremely tolerant, and totally unperturbed by the irresponsible noises. I predict that as China and Hong Kong advance to the forefront of world recognition, those familiar faces would realize that they have merely made themselves fools in front of the people, and might even lose the favors they now enjoy from the tax payers of Hong Kong and the government... 

[Note:-   Every time I hear those radicals declarations about what the Hong Kong people want, or need, or what rights they may or may not have. I thought to myself, how dare those guys represent me and my people without our agreement? Those guys have only rights to represent themselves and their own views. Even the voters might have given only their votes but not their brains away! Every time Hong Kong government begins a new legislation, it must first ask the public through repeated and careful consultations, but those guys simply decide for everybody. They owe Hong Kong people public apologies every time they take to represent me and my people without my consent. 

 

Chinese people have had 13 centuries of beautiful experience with True Democracy when all governing officials were fairly qualified by exams only. Such system was destroyed beyond repair by Western Democracy under Chiang Kai Sek, who also initiated decades of civil war and bloodshed because of it. So how can any sensible Hong Kong people, or responsible government in China, or the countless patriotic Chinese not be precautious and vigilant about the same emotion and shouts for the same Western Democracy? Chinese people by nature love the principles of True Democracy due to millenniums of Confucian philosophy. Because of that, today the Hong Kong and Chinese governments want democracy too, but it has to be the real democracy that Chinese history, Chinese civilization and Chinese people can understand and digest without the memory of the past experience and the fear for future confrontations. If however, the group that is shouting and demanding democracy does understand the intent, the care and the aspiration of their governments, both in China and in Hong Kong, then they would say to these governments "Hurray!" for their efforts to develop and experiment a new and True Democracy, instead of condemning it. But if those shouts and demands are to install Western Democracy, which had given the people decades of bloodshed and regrets, then I dare predict that as long as China has sovereignty over Hong Kong and as long as the Chinese people remember the past, also as long as the Hong Kong citizens remain rational, then it would be unrealistic to coerce or bully the governments into obeying their demands. No citizens in the world have the rights to demand their government to walk into the same past mistakes.

 

Both Hong Kong and China are doing just fine now. It is the long awaited revival of life and peace after 200 years of opium onslaught, disturbances and wars. It is also something to be rejoiced for any well wishing Chinese, any hard working people, and any loving parents. The present HK government, with the help of the central government in Beijing, has managed to safely negotiated its way through the dangerous waters of Asian economic slam, the great change of sovereignty and years of its own economic down turn, and now the people of Hong Kong are beginning to enjoy again stability and secured livelihood. These were not ordinary years! And these are no ordinary achievements! Thanks to both HK and Beijing's administrative leadership, and to the strong, calm and tolerant government heads. But we hear not a single word of praise or thanks for the governments, just pure denouncements, year in and year out, decades in and decades out, nothing but denunciations from the same faces or similar faces. Our Chief Executive has just been accused for having no visions, but without visions how could he be the head of the present government, which is seeking to initiate a true and futuristic system of democracy... Imagine if you allow those blind or plain untruthful politicians to govern one day, what would they make of your country? I wonder if Hong Kong's common folks can be so easily fooled and misguided?

 

Now suddenly someone supported by the familiar noisy group, utterly void of tangible experience, totally without past merits, rise to claim equal to the present local Chief and his over 40 years of hard work, training, dedicated civil service and achievements, recognized by all administrations by the British, the HK people and by Beijing. In fact, this group have risen only to openly obstruct and totally disrespect the goodwill, the care, the intent, the foresight and the efforts of their government to construct a better democracy. One cannot help wondering why? But it seems rather obvious! If and when someday Hong Kong's political system should unfortunately fall into the hands of those who love confrontational party politics and would do their best to create mayhem and havoc at every turn, then it would be too late for Hong Kong people to regret. But fortunately, that's rather impossible to occur, because the 21st century mankind is seeking for an improved system of democracy, and in time, the human history and every humans will be proud to remember that Hong Kong people have started the march to make a better world...

Because of the change of sovereignty, the present Hong Kong government needs support from all sides and adequate manpower to maintain peace and stability, because it has been barely a few years since the change over from the British rule. Besides, the past Hong Kong British administration was adequately supported by the wisdom and power of its London central government. Now that Hong Kong administration is an independent entity under the One Country Two System, it has become equivalent to a partial autonomy, although it is still an important part of China and strictly part of the Chinese sovereignty. Therefore, due to the newly acquired enormous responsibilities, the present Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Administration and other essential administrators at the decision making level are facing short of hands to cope with the swarms of big and small new demands from all sectors of the community, which have quickly risen as a result of sudden change from British structure to partial autonomy. Although there are some organizations that seek every opportunity to stir up demands and complaints aimed to discredit the government, but I think considering the present short of hand, the enormous recent changes, the new daily up building of new official structures and cooperation with mainland China and the newly acquired independent relationship with the rest of world, plus the threat of bird flu etc., etc., the present government of Hong Kong is totally devoted and occupied, doing an absolutely commendable job. And the police in Hong Kong is also doing very well keeping the territory clean and peaceful. Meanwhile, it is understandable that the above proposed Hong Kong style true and expanded democracy, or its equivalent, must take time and patience to build... 

However, in view of the fact that human society has reached the potential of massive mutual destruction. Any one of the 3 described time bombs must inevitably go off unless true initiative for peace begins now! All politicians must wake up from the dreams of political and military dominance, because the bigger the force is, the bigger the reaction will be. Nuclear technology is only a few years away from the reach of any nation, in fact, even any university. Where there is a will, there is also a way to do it. Nuclear bomb explosive materials can be purchased, or produced and kept hundreds of feet underground until they are needed. Global warming is not going to stop. Solar, hydraulic and wind powers will never be enough for growing human need in this century or next. Nuclear energy must be the ultimate answer for the growing human population and power consumption. Eventually all nuclear power stations would be producing clean or dirty bomb materials. Someday there would be as many nuclear engineers around as there are electrical engineers today. No one can foresee how long can the accumulated hatred, bad energy and feelings be contained in modern or future conditions! No one can predict the unknown developments and final outcome! Two out of the 3 time bombs also contain explosives accumulated over 2000 years already. It's going to release those time fouled energy sooner or later unless something is done to release the dangerous pressure. Therefore, each nation and each people must prepare their own safe haven, such as building a strong, safe, intrinsically democratic and futuristic government system. Yet, time won't wait for ever!    

The above proposed system may be regarded as "Democracy by Universal Representation". Any person who cannot accept democracy by universal representation cannot be said to be truly interested in democracy, because otherwise it will be impossible to effect direct democracy involving all sectors of the huge population. Since no one can change a modern state back to an ancient "City State Democracy" where every citizen took part in legislature. Therefore representation becomes the only possible expression of true democracy, and universal representation is by far more democratic than undemocratic decision of political parties. Then the optional choice of universal suffrage for the final outcome of the already democratically elected candidates is a further assurance and observance of democratic principles. What's more, under this system the grass roots would not only have the rights to vote in the district election but also to vote in universal suffrage. This way all the people who are not voting, including the absentees, the sick, the over aged and under aged, can all benefit from the mature and well represented decision made by Electoral Committee, and no one needs to worry which political party would end up running the country, or the cheating, the ambiguities, the disputes that are going on everyday in the world of elections. The most important aim is that the best leader can be elected by the best qualified electoral committee members, which is bound to be an improvement. Finally, once the preliminary leaders are elected, the final Universal Suffrage can still decide who is to be the leader or deputy leader. Further more, no matter how the Senate or Parliament or Congress is elected, there will be no complication of political party ambitions and struggles, which would always give a more rational election and a more stable government. 

I have earlier mentioned that since Qin Chi Huang unified China in the 3rd century BC, there was little further need for the developments in war making technologies. As a result most technological innovations and developments slowed down, the Chinese social energy took a different rout and went into interests of human to human as well as human to nature studies, and Confucian philosophy boomed. The present human civilization is approaching a somewhat similar situation. Due to the difficulty of absolute control of nuclear weapons and the increasing demand of nuclear energy, wars between humans will become increasingly dangerous and prohibitive. The human social energy must eventually seek ways to lessen national and international conflicts and wars, which would obviously also channel human energies towards the studies of practical human to human and human to nature relationships and greatly advance living standards as well as human civilization. 

My following thoughts may be a bit premature. But as the human population eventually grows massive and probably out of proportion, the humans must immigrate to the Moon, where man will learn how to live and how to immigrate to Mars. The technology to live in any solar planets would be to convert inorganic substances to organic materials, as well as to extract oxygen, hydrogen and carbon... and to excavate living quarter below the planetary surface under temperature and air control. All these things are possible with today's technology and should become realities within the present century, and the only energy that is handy and powerful enough to be brought to the planets must be nuclear energy. Therefore, there can be no doubt that nuclear energy is the future.... Unfortunately the way things go today, more coalition of war effort against each other is also possible to bring nuclear war within the present century. This is why I warn about the still raw human nature and describe the 3 ticking bombs. Mankind has now the choice either to enjoy living and working in harmony to prepare our eventual space immigration, or to gamble who or which family is going to perish in a mass destructive war. I predict that judging from historical records and what's going on today, the preying instinct of certain types of politicians are not going to change over night. For that reason they must be elected, chosen and controlled by a wiser, more mature and qualified special group of people, who in turn are chosen to represent the interests and hope of entire people.