Digital Direct Democracy or Digital Communism. The choice is yours!
This essay compares the two options because the globalist move towards a New World Order and “stakeholders capitalism” is already reached an advanced stage of realization.
Digital Direct Democracy or Digital Communism is your choice as a Canadian citizen.
Digital Communism is the goal of the World Economic Forum. It is entirely possible to achieve with today's technology.
Digital Direct Democracy is equally feasible. I would like to think that it is preferred by people who have always lived free of excessive state coercion and control.
The current landscape
Digital Communism is being implemented by globalist actors on a variety of fronts and across many nations. Communism is understood to be the ownership and control of “the means of production” under central government authority. This understanding applies to all services provided by governments on a monopoly basis. For example, government institutions currently operate monopolies for public education, medicine, law enforcement, the judicial system, accounting and finance, environment and climate change, and nearly all major media organizations.
Most importantly, Canada’s federal government controls the financial sector, money supply, interest rates and debt issuance through the Bank of Canada, the commercial banking networks, federal regulatory agencies and government monetary policy. This too is a monopoly from which there is no satisfactory escape for business owners and individual wage earners who may distrust this monopoly.
The future landscape
Central bank digital currency (CBDC) plans are currently being rolled out in several countries and is expected to replace our financial systems as we have known them during our lifetimes. In a recent ‘What Is Money’ show podcast hosted by Robert Breedlove, I learned from his guest George Gammon about the most likely implementation of the CBDC system. Consider the following scenario.
In our current financial system, when a consumer eats a restaurant meal, payment is transacted from the restaurant’s point of sale terminal to the customer’s debit or credit account held at a commercial bank such at TD. The only data that the bank collects is that which relates to the financial transaction. Commercial banks have generally had no incentive to collect customer consumption data unless there was some way to profit from it.
I recently received an “important” message from TD Bank announcing policy and service changes to Digital Banking that will go into effect in late April. Customers were urged to read the announcement details and are free to opt out of the use of the TD app and use of their debit cards if these changes are not acceptable to the customer.
Unlike traditional Communism, the people behind Digital Communism want to control “the means of production” AND the “rules of consumption!”
CBDC system will differ from the current system in a few key ways:
1. Your debit and credit accounts will be held at the Bank of Canada and no longer at your current banking institution. The existing commercial banks will only serve the loan market for such transactions as mortgages, car loans and other large purchases. Today, I learned that the 6 major Canadian banks have agreed to new “Digital Banking” regulations that appear to be the first step in rolling our a CBDC system in Canada. This makes sense because a move of all commercial banking accounts to a single commercial Bank too quickly will “spook” the trading markets and banking customers. This transition plan will also benefit from the huge IT & Communications infrastructure investments that have been made in the Big Banks, and will enable the nationwide shift to CBDC to be made unobtrusively and reasonably uneventful.
2. In the restaurant example above, the customer will pay the bill AND divulge the details of the meal you consumed. The information with by used by the Bank of Canada (or a subsidiary) to track your purchases and ensure that you don’t exceed government granted allocations. Your transaction will be verified by capturing your biometric identified ( finger print scan, retinal scan and/or facial recognition AI scan).
3. Your personal data is crucial for Digital Communism to work. By monitoring your behaviour in every one of your consumer transactions, you will participate in a Canadian Social Credit System similar to the one China has been implementing nationally. These data will be used to calculate your “Social Credit Score” to determine if you are complying with state mandated. A high score denied “good behavioir” and is rewarded according with digitally controlled privileges. In this way, your personal “degrees of freedom” will be managed by state authorities. For example, your vaccination status, consumption of meat and purchase of fossil fuels will be key metrics to ensure that your are doing your part to curb the threat of global warming or to “stop the spread” during the next pandemic.
Their goals are clear.
The WEF has stated that the two greatest threats to humanity are Climate Change and Pandemics. Mitigating these threats are their top priority. This explains why our consumption patterns and social behaviour are central drivers to achieve their stated vision for a New World Order. Their “build back better” efforts to achieve “shareholder capitalism” so that most citizens will “own nothing and be happy” are unabashedly feature in the WEF website. Private property and and all forms of meritocracy will be artifacts of the “old normal” after the “new normal” has been fully implemented.
Make no mistake about it. Global Digital Communism would not be achievable without the massive financial resources and legislative powers under the control of a dominant government sector in partnership with certain global corporations that control “shareholder capitalism” and the vast supply chain resources under their control. These partnerships are at the heart of the New World Order to which they aspire.
Comments about Communism
Traditional communism is understood to be a form of national governance that owns and manages all ‘means of production’, including every business within the nation. An often overlooked aspect of 20th century Russian communism is that the “means of production” included all forms of non-human capital (building, machinery, materials, vehicles) AND human capital (all employees). One infamous quote from a former plant worker in Russia is:
“We pretended to work and they pretended to pay us.”
Under Russian Communication, all capital stock deteriorated in its productive value. Since all non-human capital was owned by “the greater good”, a non-human language construct rather that a real person, no one bothered to maintain, repair or upgrade those assets. It is no wonder that Russian Communism failed when incentives to work and maintain productive assets were non-existent.
About Fascism, an intermediate steps towards Communism
Traditional fascism as practiced but Benito Mussoli, dictator of Italy between WW1 and WW2, is the basic model upon which modern “crony capitalism” is practiced. Fascism never ended. Instead, it evolved in the democracies of the West to the point that Cronyism has several faces - Crony Capitalism, Crony Socialism and Crony Statism. These are similar to communism insomuch as they control the means of production but does so by owning the institutions of legislated power (governments) and regulating the enterprises of commercial production (businesses). Years ago, Public-Private Partners (PPPs) became a popular idea to harness the strengths of public institutions and their funding sources with the thealents and resources of businesses in order to achieve outcomes for public benefit. Over time, those relationships grew and their objectives shifted to serve the mutual interests of the partners at public expense and liability. To summarize, ”partnerships” between government entities (funding sources, central planners and ‘rules’ enforcement) and corporations (property owners and producers) have made institutionalized arrangements that are systemic features of our provincial and national economic landscapes. They exist primarily to serve the power and privileges of the corporate and government collaborators at the expense of everyone else.
About Socialism
Traditional Socialism is understood simply as a mechanism of wealth distribution with the government as the broker. Authorized by legislation, governments are empowered to confiscate a portion of the earnings of productive individuals and private corporations using taxation and other government “revenue tools”. Magically, these revenues are sprinkled by special pixie dust to transform your earnings into “public property” to be distributes according to political criteria. For example, money may be allocated to people or organizations that fall within the government orbit of political influence and concern to “facilitate” progress towards achieving specified political priorities. Pixified money may also be awarded to politically strategic segments (advocacy groups and associations) of society whose who members self-identity as having been unfairly disadvantaged by “the patriachy” or other “oppressors” who are usually identified by the “victim” as the rich and powerful corporate executives. These disadvantaged groups are often characterized by “identity” metrics such as colour, race, gender, sexual preference, and other criteria. If these groups are of sufficient size and level of activism, they will attract the attention of politicians who will make promises that they cannot fulfil in order to pander for votes.
Karl Marx is considered the ideological father of Socialism who has acquired a huge following world-side and who’s teachings have formed the work culture found in universities, public schools, labour unions, and other public enterprises. Socialism shaped the platforms of all left wing political parties which usually win most election outcomes. Socialism is widely accepted as the intermediate step towards Communism. The political successes of left-leaning political parties over the past 60 years has continually nudged Canada futher along the road to Digital Communism,
How do traditional and modern communisms differ?
Modern Digital Communism also “owns” the human and non-human means of production. To explain this statement, the government does not “own” people in the sense of past master-slave arrangements. Instead, they can be said to “own” the loyalty of government employees because most are unwilling to “bite the hand that feeds them” and oppose the political priorities of their employer. They “self-censor” to avoid saying or doing anything that is “politically incorrect”.
Today’s governments owns the “honey pot” which was of very limited size in Communist Russia. Contemporary custodians have the ability and authority to dole out its contents for self-serving purposes.
The honey pot contains the “pixified” money AND legistated authority to allocate privileges to strategic groups in society (discussed earlier). As the size of the honey pot grows, so does the ability of its custodians to achieve specific political objectives. To understand the significance of the honey pot, consider this statement.
Money makes the world go round. Legislation controls how and where it travels.
Some members of the WEF are honey pot gatekeepers. For example, Canada’s Minister of Finance, Chrystia Freeland, is a member of the WEF’s Board of Governors with fiduciary obligations that go with that position, and she is also responsible for preparing the annual federal budget of Canada. Justin Trudeau, a WEF member since 2011, is in the position of approving and supporting that budget. Canadian Mark Carney, former Governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England, is a long term WEF member who is available to Freeland and Trudeau to offer monetary “advice”.
On the power portion of the honey pot contents, Justin presides over Parliament and has proven himself adept at creating unpopular new laws and abusing existing ones. A recent example of legislative abuse was in 2022 when he invoked the Emergies Act to suspend the constitution rights of thousands of Canadians during a peaceful, legal and populist national protest against his authoritarian covid “vaccine” mandates. Everyone has known for a long time that those jabs have failed to live up to every early safety and efficacy promise expressed by Trudeau, Health Canada officials, and pharmaceutical companies who are protected from the liabilities caused by adverse health effects from their products. When so many Canadians were aware of the failure of the pandemic policies and mandates, how is it the the one man who has the responsibility to protect all Canadians from unwanted harm and aggression could have been so ill-informed?
Canada’s magic money tree buys systemic loyalty.
In an era when central banks can generate as much money as the state needs for all operating expenses and “investments”, there has been no end to the money available for the Trudeau Government to subsidize federal departments, crown corporations (think the CBC) and dozens of agencies, boards and commissions. The same ‘pixified money pool’ is used to bribe rank-and-file tax-paid employees who’s political loyalty is purchased by improvements in their wage increases and employment perks (usually facilitated by labour unions). In addition, their are many enterprises that operate and cooperate within the governments’ orbits of influence and cronyism that receive federal ‘incentives’. This honest pot gifts encourage their support of the government’s strategic political causes. Since 2018, for example, the legacy media companies have received subsidies from the annually-replenished $595 million ‘media bailout fund’ announced by Trudeau in late 2018.
Even before a writ is dropped for any federal or provincial election in Canada, those citizens who's loyalty has been purchased by honey pot gifts do not forget the political hand (the federal Liberals) that was so generous to them. They will show their appreciation at the election polls. Justin has proven that he is very adept and well-positioned to win “the bribery game” which provides him an unrivalled election advantage. What’s more, Liberal parties have had the best “bribery game” track record since they have held power the longest. The only time they have been dethroned has been when their members were caught with their own hands in the honey pot too often.
What about lawyers and accountants?
Both legal and accounting professions benefit from large and complex government operations. They are government-licensed which bestowed on the practitioners the exclusive rights to serve members of the public whenever they run afoul of laws or face the mind-numbing rules and procedures relating to financial accounting and reporting obligations.
Lawyers and Accountants are “agents of the state”. They make a good living by enforcing government-generated laws and regulations. For this reason, few possess any reason to oppose expansions to government responsibilities that may lead to further opportunities for them to expand their profitable and exclusive services.
There are other professions that depend on working within complex laws and onerous regulations. Real estate brokers come readily to mind. Unfortunately for democracy, the proportion of Canada’s workforce that is dependent on governments for licensing or certification, employment compensation, research and other grants, and honey pot ‘gifts’ had been growing. Such dependency tips the political scales in favour of and political party that has the best history of honey pot generosity. One can reasonably expect that those ‘state dependents’ will avoid making any political choices that could compromise their own earning potential and prosperity. “The hand that feeds you”, and the certification/licensing bureaus that make your livelihood possible, provide strong incentives to keep one loyal to “the hand”.
Point of no return.
The number of politicians who campaign for ‘less government’ is very small and typically found only in “fringe” Libertarian parties that have no chance to form a government. The reason is simple. When the majority of electors are dependents of the state in one way or another, a ‘less government’ election platform is not in their interests. Survival is the strongest motivator of all. If your prosperity it tied to the honey pot, any politician who argues in favour of reducing the size and scope of influence of the honey pot will land like a lead balloon in any election campaign.
OPM addition is rampant. Other Peoples Money has created widespread dependencies that far exceeds drug dependencies. Money, which represents one portion of the honey pot, has been used by past politicians and public officials to create a nation of citizens who depend on government “pixified money”.
The easiest thing in the world for politician to do is the spend OPM to satisfy their craving for power by buying votes and securing political loyalty.
These should be a 12 step program for OPM addiction.
The ‘point of no return’ refers to my question about whether too many citizens, politicians and public servants have become so dependent on OPM and so enamored with having prime access to the honey pot that there is no going back.
I don’t know the exact proportion of the working population that receives most or all of their annual earnings through taxation or by offering professional services to the public to held them navigate the justice system the ocean of financial reporting regulations. I suspect it’s over 50%. I know, for example, that at least 75% of all government employees are members of public record labour unions which enjoy prime access to the honey pot and have used it successfully to extract more “pixified” money and legislative privileges for their members at the expense of the rest of Canada. I also know that approximately 88% of all public revenues (taxes and other “revenue tools”) pay the wages and benefits of public servants. (Note that this does not include the capital expenditures of offices, communications and computers services, etcetera). Provincial and federal budgets have not been balanced in over a generation and public debt is incurred much more frequently and at an increasing rate than is acceptable to most responsible citizens.
So, if say 50+% of Canada’s working age citizens receive their employment income from OPM (taxation or public debt), the incentive to vote for more government and its largess will always be greater than the incentive to vote for less government, balanced budgets and debt reduction. This is a recipe for pushing our cronyist economy further down the slide towards Digital Communism with few citizens awake to the risk.
It is also worth noting that public sector employment growth has been much stronger than private sector. During these last three pandemic years, the public sector grew by over 9% while private sector employment growth was less than 1%. If this trend continues, the proportion of citizens dependant on the honey pot will continue to rise until such time that our nation can entirely be “loyalty-owned” by the government.
This form of population dependency may resemble the model of communism implemented 100 years ago in Russia. It does, however, resemble the form of communism being implemented in China today under the CCP and Chairman Xi Jinping. He describes it as
“Communism with Chinese characteristics”.
Perhaps Canadians will eventually live under
“Communism with Canadian characteristics”
if Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, and deputy Prime Minister, Chrystia Freeland get their way.
Long Term planning was required.
Digital Communism will certainly be achieved through the use of the advanced technologies, but this as not been a short term endeavour. This was the vision described by WEF founder Dr. Klaus Schwab in his 2017 book the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Schwab created the WEF over 40 years ago to ensure that the enormous power of steadily improving computer and communication technologies would not be controlled by “the wrong rpeople”. Klaus was a German boy during WW2 and lived through the hardships of post-war Germany as it rebuild the nation and its economy over the subsequent decades. As the current WEF Chairman, Schwab has stated clearly that the goal of the WEF is to replace ‘shareholder capitalism’ with ‘stakeholder capitalism.’ This strategy requires the elimination of private property rights for citizens and businesses. He wants all property to serve humanity for “the greater good” under central planning on a global scale. In what form this vision will ultimately take is uncertain. We will only understand it AFTER we experience it and by then it may be too late to do anything about it.
Traditional communism abolished private property rights in favour of ownership by the sole authority of the state. The greatest weakness of pre-computer communism was econometric. No accurate means existed to determine the real supply and demand dance between citizens (consumers and workers) and businesses (producers, consumers and capital investors) . In free market capitalism, this information came from prices. Price Theory and its application to product pricing in free markets revealed the critical role the the prices play in supply and demand dynamics. The West propered while the East became impoverished mainly because of Price Theory.
Product pricing strategies are well understood and fundamental to demand planning and forecasting within the free market economies of the Digital Age. Communist central planners can and do reap comparable benefits from modern technology as seen in ‘free trade’ economies. In both cases, consumer data can be collected and analyzed in real time to trigger production and supply processes even if prices are not part of the economic calculus.
Combining modern surveillance technologies with Digital Commerce offers new possibilities to nations. Much more data about human consumption preferences and patterns are easy to capture reliably and inexpensively. These new capabilities provide central planners with far better tools to understand population behaviours on many levels including supply and demand dynamics.
I have no doubt that Digital Communism is coming to humanity and democracies must prove a mechanism to include the voices of citizens to ensure a power balance between centrally planned ‘collectivism’ and the constitutionally guaranteed Rights and Freedoms defined in the Bill of Rights and the Canadian Charter.
Digital Democracy is an equally viable possibility for humanity and provides that mechanism of balance. Only the political and public will to realize it is needed. Its greatest advantage to the cause of democracy is that it can prevent (or mitigate) the need of large central planning and enforcement bureaucracies that Digital Communism requires.
Digital Direct Democracy.
What is digital direct democracy and how can it be realized?
The term “democracy” invokes the image of a society in which citizens and property owners possess the freedom of informed choice to use their body, mind and efforts to create or earn material and intellectual assets and decide what to do with them. It is understood by most citizens that they are free to use their property and resources to serve their needs and priorities as business owners (producers) and individual citizens (consumers), or to help others within their ‘communities of choice’ voluntarily. No coercion is required as long as fair and unbiased laws exist to protect and defend every citizen from unwanted and intentional harm and aggression from others (including persons employed by the state).
Democracy stands precariously is on a slippery slope in modern times. The above understanding of ‘democracy’ and its implied and constitutionally defined rights and freedoms have been steadily eroded by the increasing presence of large institutions of central planning and control - better known as governments.
Canadians face an existential problem. The size, cost, and scope of authority held by a public institutions have far surpassed their optimal levels to serve our citizens. Moreover, governments generally offer “collective” solutions to a nation of 36 million individual human beings. Public services have been inevitably bureaucratic, impersonal, costly and inflexible. They employ a one-size-fits-all approach. In the modern Digital Economy under a decentralized system of Digital Democracy, most if not all of those unacceptable consequences of instituted managed as public monopolies can and should be rectified.
For starters, government public services should only exist to meet essential needs. By trying to be “all things to all people from cradle to grave”, government overreach has been devastating to average Canadians - their person self-esteem, resourcefulness and sense of pride in personal responsibility. We must restore Canadian pride, reduce dependencies on the honey put, and enable our citizens to accept as much personal responsibility as feasible for themselves and their dependents. By “overreach”, I mean that too many public services are offered to address discretionary needs which may be better served in a decentralized manner without government involvement.
Introduce competition.
Modern governments are a myriad of monopolies that do not allow, or else actively discourage, competitors from participating in serving the public. These monopolies, for example, serve education, healthcare, policing, the judicial system, climate change, and other domains. Consumers and citizens have few viable options but to subscribe to, and fund these monopolies.
Allow government and non-government options.
Libertarians seek to introduce competition into these areas. Examples of those policy goals are seen here.
We envision competitive markers to replace government monopolies.
A range of government and nongovernment service providers in a competitive education sector will better serve the unique needs of students and their parents. Furthermore, if a child attends a non-government school, there is no justification for the parent to pay taxes to subsidize any other competing schools, including those operated by the government. The tax savings can rightfully be applied to the fees charged for the student to attend a non-governmental education organization.
I provide another example of a Digital Direct Democracy application in my new book What to do about CLIMATE CHANGE- a Libertarian proposal. It offers a plan to reduce industrial Greenhouse Gas emissions with no government involvement. The proposal describes an operation call “Bigfoot” that will be far more effective in helping Canadian industrial CO2 emitters to reduce their carbon footprint in a measurable, transparent, accountable, entertaining and educational manner. My ultimate hope is to leverage a Bigfoot’s success to justify the elimination of federal departments that possess those responsibilities. By closing down these departments, taxation for their continued operation will no longer be required. The associated legislation and regulations can be repealed to prevent any ambitious public servant from easily reviving the Climate Change Governmental Complex in the future without great effort.
I believe that success breeds more success. If Bigfoot succeeds, spin offs will likely follow and other government monopolies can be eliminated, reduced and re-imagined under the Digital Democracy paradigm and the principle of Freedom of Informed Choice. Imagine of other domains under government authority were to embrace competition and follow the ideas presented herein, a shrinking public sector will result and lead to balanced budgets and much better service to the public.
Let’s consider the application of Digital Direct Democracy on the existing Climate Change Governmental Complex. As my book explains, opinions vary on the need for and ability of governments to “manage” the global climate, its atmospheric gas concentrations, and its planetary temperature. People can be classified as alarmists ( crisis believers), skeptics (unconvinced that a crisis exists), and agnostics ( not interested in the topic). Using digital technology in a similar manner are the CBDC rollout described earlier, citizens can opt out of selected government mandates. For example, Climate Change skeptics should be exempt from paying all forms of carbon taxes. When purchasing gasoline at the pump, carbon taxes would not be based on their beliefs and registered preferences. The same would apply to any fossil fuel purchase such made by all truckers that are essential for supply chain networks to operate cost-effectively, heating fuels for homes and businesses, and tools used by tradesmen and the household handy man (chain saws, lawn mowers, snow removal equipment, etc). These democratic choices will surely reduce the cost of living for every Canadian business and consumer.
Note that every alarmist can register in the Digital Direct Democracy system the desire to pay these taxes. Agnostics will have the same choice and can be identified digitally.
Social Preferance System restores democratic balance.
The idea of counterbalancing of yin and yang has Chinese origins.
The Chinese government is implementing a Social Credit System (SCS) according to many journalists and other sources who report on alternative media platforms such as Substack. I wonder if yin-yang thinking has been applied to it.
The Chinese SCS appears to be the preferred template to emulate for global implementation rich and well-connected globalists such as Bill Gates and many WEF members.
If implemented globally, I propose a yin to balance the yang of the SCS if it has been overlooked by the central planners of the New World Order. If a CBDC with social credit metrics is already operational in some nations (a pilot project in the UK is alleged to be operational), it can be adapted for use as a complement mechanism for Digital Democracy which will support and enforce the opt-in and opt-out preferences of each citizen.
For example, let’s say that you don’t wish to be subjected to that dictates and liabilities associated international agreements that have been created and promoted by the United Nations or the World Health Organization, and signed by our federal government. Your preference to opt out of the Paris Accord, or any other global covenant, could be recorded in the same database as the Social Credit System and enforced according to Canada’s Bill of Rights. In addition, if you wish to opt out of participation in the Canadian version of Social Credit System, this too could be a register democratic option recorded in the same database. In such a case, all bill payments must be transacted by forbid the capture of any data useful to a CDN Social Credit System.
Note that every citizen will be free to choose to opt in or opt out of these systems. This is how yin-yang balance can be established in a Digital Democracy. The democratic principle of Freedom of Informed Choice (this implies informed consent) must always be an available option and faithfully enforced in a genuinely democratic civil society. No central planner, either domestic or global, should ever be allowed to impose policy mandates on Canadian citizens and property owners by fiat.
Canada is a sovereign nation and must remain so.
Excuse me for not knowing the history of international agreements between nations. If Canada is still a sovereign nation (I hope it is but have my doubts), does it make sense to cede our sovereign authority to agreements prepared and promoted by the United Nations, the World Health Organization or any other would-be faction of a New World Order? Such agreement must never be eternally binding if signed at all! Unlike Russia, China, Cuba and other non-democratic counties, Canada holds elections every four years during which political circumstances and public priorities can change drastically.
In my view, international agreements between Canada and globalist entities must (if signed at all) be subject to the following conditions:
Every Canadian province and territory must be free to opt-in or opt-out of any expectations and liabilities stipulated by an international pact signed by the federal government. If no regions choose you opt-in, the agreement will be deemed unratified by the free citizens of Canada.
Any international agreement signed by Ottawa must be subject to a ‘sunset clause” with each change of government every four years. Providions will exist for each region to renew ratification if desires or opt-out according to the preferences expressed voluntarily by each citizens of each province or territory.
References will be registered in the CDN Social Preference System in the manner of a live and perpetual referendum on important public topics and will replace and extraneous polls conducted by government and nongoverment providers of surveys as valid data to represent broad social preferences.
Every nation is unique. Every region within Canada has unique economic, social and cultural circumstances. For this reason, I believe it to be none of my business what other nations, and Canadian regions choose for public policies. For example, a digital Social Credit System operating under Communist rule may be appropriate for China given the size of its population, his cultural history and its economic circumstances. As a Canadian citizen, who am I to say what is best for China?
However, as a Canadian citizen for over 70 years, I am a legitimate stakeholder and a shareholder (I have paid $millions in taxes) of this nation. Canada has a mere 36 million citizens with a history of democracy and vast lands that are rich in natural resources. It is difficult to justify a Chinese form of Digital Communism and Social Credit citizen control in Canada.
Why a Canadian Social Preference System?
A Canadian Social Preference System could easily survey and record the choices of all voting age Canadians to enable them to opt-in or opt-out of many government programs and commitments. In the Chinese Social Credit System, surveillance, communications and database technologies are currently in use to monitor and track the CCP-preferred metrics of each citizen. A Canadian Social Preference System could monitor an entirely different set of metrics that could improve life in Canada AND ensure that every citizens privacy and security are protected at their own discretion. It’s the design of the system that matters, not the fact of its existence. If every citizen’s opt-in and opt-out preferences are established and securely protected on their terms, this could provide the ultimate in democratic living in Canada empowered by constitionsly-protected Freedom of Informed Choice.
The implication for banking are straight forward. I have no doubt that the Bank of Canada will be able to manage your credit and debit accounts in the same way as your current commercial bank. It must be, however, operate at arms length from the BoC head office to build a wall between the political influences of the federal government and the snake pit of Parliamentary politics. The creators of operations the CPPIB wiselt chose to put distance between its investment operations that are described globally and the Canada Pension Plan administrative head office in Ottawa for this very reason. (The CCPIB is my former client with whom I carried out and completed five executive searches for key senior positions)
It seems inevitable to mevthat Canada’s banking system will be transformed into a CBDC that will be linked a database which contains your personal data. The amount and type of data collected must be restricted to your informed consent in order to be democratically viable. This new system will come with advantages, disadvantages as well as potential risks and opportunities. It is best that each citizen weighs these tradeoffs against his of her circumstances.
One thing is certain. Technology is changing our world much faster than at any time in human history. Can it be stopped? Do we want it to stop? Or should we accept it as our reality and take control of when and how much of its changes we are individually prepared to take on at different periods of our lives.
On a personal level, I will certainly opt out of any and all liability and taxes for the alleged climate change crisis. In my opinion, it has been a very successful political and government boondoggle that has fed government coffers and needs for growth for over the last 30 years. The honey pot loves boondoggles like that climate change crises and the Climate Change Governmental Complex (CCGC) monstrosity that expanded from it.
My book argues that governments efforts to curtail the man-made, global warming threat have failed spectacularly. It is clear that the time has come to mothball the CCGC and employ newer methods that are more effective and simultaneously respect the Freedom of Informed Choice to participate, or not, is addressing the CO2 emissions concern on their own terms. The Bigfoot proposal addresses this topic in detail and many perspectives.
In summary…
If Digital Communist can become a reality, so can Digital Direct Democracy. You can think of Digital Democracy as a technology-enable Direct Democracy.
The choice between the two is ultimately the responsibility of every citizen and can be acted upon at the election ballot box. Unless our citizens act to protect genuine democracy in Canada, and choose politicians who are committed to the goals of Digital Democracy, then Digital Communism is likely to become our collective future.
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
I leave you with the words of Edmond Burke and to offer this advice to all Canadians:
Choose carefully. The future of Canada is in your hands.
