A New Tactic Ends War By Using
Naturally Occurring Societal Forces To "Force" Adversarial Nations Into
War and PeeCE
By: M. J. Sperry
"No war by any nation in any time has ever been declared by the people"
Eugene Debs 1855-1926
The truth of the above quote is self evident. While the quote speaks
for itself, it
also implies that an inhibiting connection should exist between the
declaration of war and the people who have to fight the war, a connection that must
pass directly and exclusively through the citizen's vote. Question: Why would anyone who
actually had to fight and possibly die in war, declare war? Answer: For only one reason; because there simply is no other alternative.
Warlike society and genuine suffrage
are mutually exclusive
If the Debs Principle is accepted as true, then it follows that in a warlike society genuine suffrage must be non-existent and conversely, non-existent suffrage becomes a prodigious predictor of warlike behavior. In a warlike society either the vote is overtly non-existent, or it is only an elaborate facade, certainly involving a coerced or complicit media to complete the deception. Genuine suffrage automatically moderates a society. The knowledge of this raises the possibility of a simple solution to an age old problem, war.
war (wor) n. 1. the violent, though subtle result of a
lack of genuine suffrage
A Shining Example of A Peaceful Nation
If the Debs Principle is valid, then there should be examples of nations that rarely go to war, where the people are in control through their vote. There should also be examples of nations that regularly are at war, where the people lack control through a facade of a vote.
Consider Switzerland, the foremost democracy of the world. Many have the mistaken impression that the Swiss are controlled by the banking system they are so well known for. Actually, it is just the opposite. The Swiss people hold as tight a reign on their banking system as they do on their government.
The Swiss abandoned their Constitution in the 1930s, adopted a new one modeled on the U.S. Constitution, then added many new amendments and refinements. The people control everything through their elected leaders, with provision to easily repeal unpopular laws directly through referendum. Elected leaders simply don't make laws they know the people will reverse.
As to 'war', Switzerland hasn't been at war in almost 500 years. The last time its army actually fought was out of self defense with the invasion of Napoleon in 1798. Though it has been neutral since 1515 it is no wimp. A good thing since it is not a member of the UN nor NATO. It is armed to the teeth, with a very well provisioned militia and takes its equivalent of our second amendment quite seriously.
By the time a citizen reaches 18 they have been checked out on the use of various weaponry. They are then permanently
issued a machine gun and ammunition which they store away, just in case. During World War II the
one country Adolph Hitler reportedly wanted to invade more than any
other was Switzerland. His Generals talked him out of it, after convincing him of
the terrible price to be paid for such a transgression. Clearly the Swiss
experience constitutes compelling evidence, that while the vote moderates a society, it doesn't turn that
society into sheep who aren't prepared to fight, if they have to.
The USA - The Most Warlike Nation on Earth
During the period 1776 through 1876, there were two external wars fought by the U.S., the War of 1812 against the British and
the Mexican-American War. Between 1876 and today (133 yrs) there
been no less than eight wars the U.S. has initiated or participated in, not counting its many overt (and covert) warlike “actions. In light of the preceding, the Debs Principle would
vote was somehow lost during this latter time period 1876-2009.
In 2007 the author of this essay
published an ebook entitled: Desiderata Of The Citizen Vote.(1) The
book dealt with several things but most notably, its documented assertion that the
vote was first stolen on an orchestrated national scale, during the elections of
the 1880's. This was precisely the same time frame that the “secret ballot was introduced in the United States.
For the first 100 years the U.S. vote was openly conducted viva voce, or by "voice vote". Not just the Registrar of Voters, but everyone within listening distance could hear and
notate the vote, then later compile all their notations for a comparison
to the Registrar's final count. If all agreed, the vote was rightfully considered irrefutable. The introduction of the
Secret Ballot eliminated this alternative
verification and made possible the ongoing
theft of the vote, of which we are occasionally given glimpses (2000
& 2004 elections). Secrecy is the enabling characteristic of vote fraud. Without vote secrecy, vote fraud becomes
the beginning of tyranny"
PeeCE: Peer Certified Elections
If war is the result of the lack
of a real vote, then "peace" would have to be the
result of the possession of a real vote. But simply dropping a genuine vote into the laps of the
typical citizen carries with it problems. Think of PeeCE as a “toolbox" of five tools, all designed to solve these problems and make the
transition to PeeCE smooth and successful.
Specifically, PeeCE is a means by which two or more adversarial nations
could end hostilities and achieve lasting "peace", by genuinely placing the
ability to make war fully and exclusively into the hands of its
PeeCE, two or
more parties enter into a PeeCE agreement in which each operates in a certified democratic fashion, that includes a peer audit of the others
election to ensure the other is in compliance. Why "peer certification"? Because it solves the following major impediment to the
implementation of PeeCE.
Consider that the leaders of a nation engaged in
escalating hostilities, might be justifiably concerned that an adversary would
only agree to a PeeCE proposal, as a ruse to moderate the others aggressiveness. Then later, lulled into a state of
complacency and weakness, be attacked by their adversary. For PeeCE to work it is therefore essential that both
parties be able to verify, with certainty, that
other is in compliance and not just faking it. They would have to know
that the citizens of their adversary are in genuine control through
their vote. Thus
form peer certification might take would have to be bullet proof. It would have to be a
system that would on close scrutiny engender confidence, as so much would be
riding on it.
Vva - Tool #1
Until recently any election audit might have raised more
questions than it answered. But now, a new and powerful election audit system has been
that was intended to audit and verify U.S. elections. It is called Vva,(2) an
acronym for Voter verified audit, an
in which voters themselves verify their own vote. Vva's power stems from
its affirmative response to the one big question no vote security
system in use today can satisfactorily answer:
"Who can best be trusted to incorruptibly verify the vote?" Vva's resounding answer is; "voters themselves".
In this particular case, it must be assumed that if a voter wanted to somehow alter (tamper
with) their own
would simply choose their "alteration" in the voting booth rather than later. If in the process of
tampering they make a "different" choice for whatever reason, they aren't tampering, they're voting. That is, in the voting booth all a voter can do is either vote or not vote, both of which are acceptable, no matter who they vote for. This makes the voter them self a virtually incorruptible
verifier of their own vote.
Further, Vva can be exclusively citizen operated and completely
independent of government. An important point, since government exclusively checking its own vote count, the very instrument that
decides whether it stays or goes, constitutes an obvious conflict of interest. Vva can simply, innocuously and
irrefutably detect virtually any kind of election fraud down to levels
of less than 1%, depending on sample size, which could easily reach 100%. It is the "canary" of elections. If an election has been
tampered with, Vva
"If Ya' Want It Done Right, Do It Yourself"
Winston Churchill once remarked,
"The best argument against democracy, is a five minute conversation with the average voter". In retort: "The best argument for democracy, is an end of war". Still, Mr. Churchill's remark was
well taken and points up an obvious problem with PeeCE-ful democracy; is the average citizen
ready for it?
Well, most people can read and write. Most importantly, virtually all of us can “read the writing on the wall". We have a good idea of what we want and don't want, and “war" is certainly at the top of the “don't want" list. There are however many things of which the average person
is ignorant or doesn't have the sophistication to understand. Both problems could be
solved through enlightened “truth". But what is truth and how will we know it when we see it? Philosophers and the
intelligentsia have grappled with that question since Aristotle. We don't have thousands
of years more to answer that question. What is being proposed here requires that we answer the
The American Truth Project - Tool #2
Over the last few years there has been a concept that has been trying to get started but hasn't quite made it yet. It is called The American Truth Project(3) and its lofty purpose has been, to generate an accurate understanding of the world around us. Doing that requires that the truth of things be known, as closely as can be determined. To that end, TATP attempts to determine precise truth on a grand scale, using a special "truth engine" developed especially for the job. It is called "Descartes".(4)
Descartes "plugs" all candidates for truth into its engine, whose active element is
for now common sense, something
will probably morph in the future into some type of open-source, algorithm
a process for deconstructing one sentence statements of proposed
truth, or "hypothesis statements", into their fundamental parts or
each premise using rigorous analysis for quality and truthfulness.
That process will ultimately output a "figure of merit" of 1-99% as to the probability of truth of important issues. Understand, Descartes will only do the heavy lifting here. The actual decision of what is and is not the truth will and must always remain in the hands of the citizen. Though only in its infancy, Descartes is already quite formidable.
Truth-systems modeled on TATP
could be used to bridge the gap between where,
intellectually a nation is now and where it needs to be in the future, to collectively make the
important decisions it and only it can make.
The New Media - Tool #3
All of this could of course easily get bogged down, if not conveyed with integrity, in an easy to understand and even entertaining fashion. PeeCE dictates that media will have to accommodate the new needs of the citizenry, its audience. This comes at a time when media in many countries is losing enormous share to newer media forms, share moving "from" rather than “toward" an old media that cannot satisfy its need for “certainty" of delivered content. The audience is becoming increasingly discontented with medias omissions, distortions, lies and mindless drivel.
Some directions new-media might take. Old formats could be used and reworked such as; news shows modified to use two anchors, each taking a different position in the delivery of the news. Game shows, historical dramas and the "60 minutes" news format could be expanded on and enhanced. Ideally, new formats could be developed that would precisely match this new audience, such as formal debate and especially this new and powerful technique of idea presentation called “mind mapping".
There is a market for truth. Truth could become the next commodity and save present media from the garbage can of history. Indeed, if done correctly it might even elevate media back to its supreme pedestal of unimpeachable truth, but it's going to have to work hard for that one.
Amnesty - Tool #4
What's being proposed here is an ongoing truth commission of sorts. Truth will surface that will be at best embarrassing and at worst incriminating. It must be recognized that we are going through the final stage of a trilogy of ages. First was the jungle. Then a couple of hundred years ago we moved into a period of enlightenment, coupled with the industrial revolution. Certainly the early thinkers could have never envisioned all that has come to pass, especially recently.
Third, is the new time we are entering. Technology has delivered us to the doorstep of unimaginable plenty. It has been well kept from the eyes of America, but virtually all mass produced goods have been manufactured by machines, especially robots, for at least the last decade. This has all been principally driven by the development of the computer. While this will free many people to enjoy their lives, it has also brought other ominous possibilities.
The weapons possessed and the ease of which they can be
built and otherwise acquired, makes our immediate future tenuous if not impossible. We must get there, to the future. To do so we must
cut-the-cord of the past. Without a General Amnesty those who will be incriminated
by the new found knowledge of the citizen, will attempt to inhibit a smooth transition to the “new". We must recognize that we all have acted less than
perfect, in a
past time where things were, less than perfect. We are capable of much better, because we are all human beings and the one thing we know
for certain about our species, is that we are highly adaptive. We can change if it is in our best interest. To that end, I will make one last
SuperCapitalism – Tool #5
To truly make PeeCE work, it would be extremely beneficial to jazz the average citizen, the one who is at the center of all this. To strap on to society some kind of “supercharger”, so to speak. To create some kind of big carrot that would induce them do anything and everything they had to, to make this all happen. With that in mind, a plan called “SuperCapitalism" was devised.
In the 1930s Benito Mussolini used the term "Super Capitalism" to define another term
which he later became synonymous with, "Fascism". The author used it as well in a previous essay published
SuperCapitalism: The Sperry Plan To Rescue The U.S. Economy.(5) The
essay was in response to a query by our then new President Obama, for ideas and input by
which the U.S. economy
might be mended. SuperCapitalism may be the kind of "big carrot", that could induce the
average citizen into sending PeeCE into the stratosphere.
We Are Not a Capitalistic Society
In almost mantra like fashion we repeat one to the other, that we are a “capitalistic society", without ever considering
that very few of us are actually capitalists. It raises the question; Is it possible that the reason true capitalism has failed
to meet our highest expectations is because we, as a society, actually only practice capitalism to a minor degree?
In this case, since the word 'society' is used in conjunction with the word "capitalistic" it implies “all of us" and since virtually none of us, according to the latest statistics, actually derive most of, indeed any of our sustenance from a return on investment or profit, it seems it could be argued successfully that we are not a capitalistic society.
I don't mean to denigrate capitalism here, as it has produced a great bounty for all Americans in terms of selection of products at ever decreasing price. However, in terms of any kind of 'return on investment' for the average person, it has produced practically nothing. This is because there simply is no 'investment' for the average person. The average person is completely outside the very system he professes to be a part of. The Sperry Plan will change that. It will make everyone who participates a capitalist, a SuperCapitalist.
The Sperry Plan would result in the very rapid creation
of many small investment companies modeled on traditional venture
capital groups. Each
would only be allowed to invest $10 a week, a small amount to be sure, but this would be a “ground floor investment" of great potential, built on “fail safe" methods that should ensure the success of these companies
while preventing failure.
The projected long term earnings are right off the charts. The Sperry Plan has the very real potential of making all who participate, well, quite wealthy. This by creating “new wealth instead of scavenging “old money" and would probably result in a far greener environment as well.
I ask, does this sound like the kind of carrot that could get people motivated. The plan was created with Americans in mind but would almost certainly work in any stable culture or society, the kind of society PeeCE would create. PeeCE and SuperCapitalism would produce the kind of contented citizenry that would head off conflict long before it ever got started.
I ask that you consider these words carefully, as the whole future of
the world now rests on our shoulders. Thank you for reading this/mac
© 11/01/09 - M. J. Sperry – All rights to this work are relinquished to the public
only if reprinted in its entirety, including disclaimer. Please distribute widely.
1,2) See: "Why You Can't Vote Them Out"A trilogy of articles that ran on several Internet websites in 2007. They comprise a synopsis of the “vote theft" section of the ebook: Desiderata of The Citizen Vote - By: M.J. Sperry
3) See: - The American Truth Project
4) See: - Descartes
5) See: - SuperCapitalism:
The Sperry Plan To Rescue The U.S. Economy