White Biocentrism

This also applies to organizations. How the power is distributed is very important. I do not have to explain why democracy is bad pierce already explained that well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViN7rzPuXq8

Why Democracy sucks.
Imagine that you are a dictator and should resign, You should select a certain number of members a Senate that will get the highest judicial power. Furthermore, you should pick out a certain number of people who get to vote, more on this later.

The advantage to distribute power over several people is that the redundancy gets better, i,e it will be less serious if a senator would take a wrong decision than if a dictator makes the wrong decision because a majority hopefully vote correctly.

However, there are very drawbacks to distribute power over too many people
-incitement for an individual to understand the issues and take the right decisions reduces.
-harder to maintain high intelligence among the chosen ones.
-harder to ensure that the voters is independent thinkers, this actually leads to less redundancy since most voters will be lead by a few people advocating them how to vote.
-Difficult to maintain proper racial quality in general for those in power, people who are ugly, overweight, short, poorly trained and so will probably oppose a correct policy regarding eugenics and freshness ideal.
-harder to make the selection in a good way if you choose many people, you will no longer be able to examine the persons by your own, instead you will have to delegate that process or use a very simple selection criteria.

In a democracy, no choice is made at all, everyone can vote no matter how stupid, ugly and uninterested they are. In a democracy the media will get a lot of power and often a huge amount of effort will be made in order for the masses to support the current system.

Often, there is a power struggle between the rulers and the media, in a 'true democracy' critical media will be allowed which means they risk losing power. Considering who controls the media today, it is perfectly understandable that rulers choose to intervene against media and imprison journalists. it all is, unfortunately, doomed to failure because the media today is global and a single country can not do much about it.

The reason why many are for democracy is selfish and irrational reasons. It may be that they belong to those who receive money from the dysgenic welfare state, more likely is that they associate mass-democracy with nice things and dictatorship with unpleasant things (mass graves and war).

It is true that elite rule and dictatorship are often harder but this is not bad, it is not good for the race to steal money from successful in order to provide welfare to people who should not spread their genes. Often you need take uncomfortable decisions, however the stupid masses will oppose these which leads to more suffering in the long run.

If we had been tougher on those who today control the media, banks, etc. and ensured that the country remained racially pure so we would not have much problem. Instead we are sitting now in a much worse situation and the solutions required are now much more brutal (mass executions, etc.). If Hitler had handled the Jews more rational we would have been spared much of the current problems.

Today's problems can only be solved by authoritarian rule, let us now look at how this can be designed.

Senate
It is the judicial and power for non-citizens and highest legislative power, the Senate consists of 15 seats. It will be possible for one person to hold more than one seat in the Senate and then successor appointed independently for each location senator holds and always designate first to fourth replacement (no more). When deputy senators is replaced a single senator can enforce a delay period of at most 90 days, two senators can set the delay period to at most 150 days, if no senator objects a senator can replace his deputies immediately

Local boards
A local board has seven seats and board members elect their own successors (first to fourth). Deputies to local boards can be replaces immediately(no delay period). A unanimous Senate may replace members of a local boards but Otherwise the local boards is independent.

When a member of a local board is replaced the successors of the board cannot be replaced during the first 150 days. If a members of a local board resigns or dies the first successor will takeover and appoint the forth successor.
Each local board are allowed to upgrade a certain number of B-citizens to A.

Each local board is allowed to upgrade a certain number of B-citizens to class A.

Changing the how the country is govern
This can be requested by a senator or 15 A2 citizens. When a member of the Senate requests amendment of the form of government the A-citizens(one vote each) will be allowed to vote on the proposal, the vote will be held after 20 days. Each senator will be able to lay a proposal for vote within 3 days(plus 1 day for each new proposal).

The vote is invalid and stopped if unless the new proposal win by 0.03*(the number of A-citizens) votes over all other proposals(and the current system) for each senator that does not approve the change. There are no restrictions whatsoever on any changes that may be implemented, it is even allowed to reintroduce mass democracy (this is extremely stupid)

Citizen Classes
A highest class. A0 means that you are Senator, Vice A1 senator or member of the national council, A2 that is the replacement for member of the national council or not the first deputy to the Senate, not the first A3 deputies to the National Council, other citizens of class A has A4.
B honorary citizen. There is B0 (the best) and B1.
C citizens. C0 is given to prominent warriors and other good citizens. C1 to individuals that completed military service, other citizens have C2.
D non-citizen allowed within the borders, the number of non-citizens within the borders should not exceed 1% of the number of citizens.
E non-citizen not allowed within the borders.
F enemy of the race.

For a population of 100 million citizens can see the following distribution is likely to work well.

A0: 15            can immediately change the constitution with the support of 71% of the A-citizens.
A1: 85            can give citizenship to a certain number of individuals.
A2: 115          cannot get citizenship downgraded.
A3: 210          cannot be prosecuted for crime.
A4: 3000        A1 appeal cannot be stopped when losing in the senate.
B0: 30000      a 13 vote margin is required to stop A1 appeal after losing in the senate.
B1: 300000    an 11 vote margin is required to stop A1 appeal after losing in the senate.
C0: 3000000
C1: 30000000
C2: 67777575
D: <500000

Only nationals of class A can be a valid substitute senator or member of local board. The senate can with big enough majority(7 more yes than no votes) change which citizens that have citizenship of class A, if the senate approves the changes the minimal time delay is (1500,750,500,350,250,200,150,100,50) days before the change takes effect for a win margin of (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15). The senate requires ordinary majority to cancel time-delayed upgrades/downgrades.

A margin of 4 votes is required to add or remove citizenship of class B1 and there will be a delay period of at least(500, 300, 225, 200, 175, 150, 125, 100, 75, 50, 25,0) days(depending on win margin). An individual senator can also upgrade a certain numbers of citizens to class B1. A margin of 5 votes is required to add or remove citizenship of class B0 and there will be a delay period of at least(350, 250, 200, 175, 150, 125, 100, 75, 50, 25,0) days(depending on win margin)

The senate can immediately add or remove citizenship of class C, a margin of 3 votes will be required, a senator can veto the downgrade for up to 500 citizens(the veto last one year). Ordinary majority is required for the following changes
C0 ⇿ C1 ⇿ C2
D0 ⇿ D1 ⇿ D2 ⇿ E0 ⇿ E1 ⇿ F0 ⇿ F1 ⇿ F2 ⇿ F3 ⇿ F4 ⇿ F5 ⇿ F6

If the senate rules against citizens(s) an individual senator will be able to request an A1 vote unless the appeal is stopped(requires a margin of 9 votes for class C), all A1 citizens will be permitted to vote. The ability for a senator do force A1 vote and delay/stop downgrade of citizenship exist to limit the power of the senate in favor of the local boards and A-citizens. If there is a case between a A4 and B1 citizen the A4 citizen will have to win by 11 votes and the B1 citizens will have to win unanimously in the senate, otherwise a A1 vote will settle the case.

Referendums and parliamentarianism
The Senate may choose to have elections to various wards and choose which citizen classes that is required to participate in the elections. The following are examples only:

Corresponding today's king(Sweden, England, etc) is elected by the citizens of Class C1 (or better). Citizens of class B0 or ​​better will be allowed to vote the parliamentary elections where A-citizens is allowed to participate on lists(no party registration is required). Naturally, it shall be permissible for a person To be elected several times (if it appears several times on the list / lists).

The aim is to give the stupid mass power over certain trivialities which will make the system more stable. The system is still honest because it is clear that the A-citizens have a lot of power, the united states has a very powerful supreme court and almost all citizens accept that concept.

Selection process
Even now business offers opportunities for qualified individuals to succeed, academia and the military need to be adapted so that the selection is better. You should only be able enter the government-funded universities through entrance tests. The masses will have to use the library, internet or pay for higher education themselves.

It is important that those who lead us are the best of people, this includes beauty, physical strength and courage.

It is obvious that many in the Senate will get its place by his father sitting in the Senate, this may seem unfair but it also comes with advantages, the system becomes stable and infiltration will be very difficult to conduct(near impossible). Children should be given the same citizen-class as the parent of the lowest class, technically all new citizens(included children) still need approval(ultimately decided by the senate).

There will be large deficit of women of class B1 and above, this means that women will be a final step in the selection process. The few men who manages to find a Class-A woman will then form the family where the children is born as A-citizens. Men who are sexually attractive will therefore be easier to have babies born with power and this will account for eugenics that would be very difficult for the state to conduct.

Why I oppose giving all power to one person
There are of course many examples where it has worked well because a person has all power, many businesses are built up by a single person as a leader. A country can survive a company going bankrupt due to mismanagement but it we do not want to see a new USSR, the state is a very dangerous power and most people murdered has been murdered by their own government.

I would say that at different times, different types of government are necessary. I am partial to the idea of a sovereign, warrior-aristocracy, middle-class, and laborers. Each individual has a place in society that is appropriate to them. This lines up with Julius Evola's idea of a proper society being akin to a human body. There must be a head, arms, stomach, feet, and etc. That is a distant concern. We have to be busy about recruiting and planting seeds for now.

Even the people we choose as rulers is completely random it will not be a good idea to choose too many, the incentive for each individual to make the correct decisions will then be small.

The rulers will need to look into a lot of issues, roads, speed limits, taxes, chemicals in food, the list goes on. Even with separations of power(different boards for different purposes) we cant expect the government to solve everything, we still need to have market economy and a lot of people dedicated into creating this new white world.

For example did you know speed limits should be set high for best traffic safety? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BKdbxX1pDw

The rulers need to be completely dedicated to the task, this would not work if the entire population has to participate in every issue. Most people today prefer to focus on their life's and this is understandable, i am sure most people would be satisfied with a few referendums(look at Third Reich).

Direct power over an organization or country shouldn't just be given for free to anyone interested(paying membership fee or voting) it should be something hard to get and and hard to loose once you get it. Very few people today deserve the right to vote, this applies to both genders.

If the board for an organization has 9 seats 5 more "yes" votes than "no" votes should be required to change the list of accepted members, it should also be a minimum time delay before the change takes effect unless all 9 vote for it(if the members has direct power). Something similar should be optimal if you rule a country.

The us constitution is a failure even if it protects a few people today(Alex Linder would be jailed if he lived in Sweden). What really matters is who has the judicial power, not a piece of paper. It is worrying that the Jews dominate the law school, then it wont matter which laws we make.

What really matters if the legal system brakes down is the distribution of violence potential and who controls the media. If we wanted to fool the people we could let them vote on the laws while we have the legal power and media, but this would not be a honest way to rule a country and hence not preferable as a long term solution.

kaliyuga85 wrote:I would say that at different times, different types of government are necessary.

This is very true, this is why i suggested several alternatives in the first post. Currently a powerful government might be needed to solve this mess, in the future i think it is better with less government and more personal responsibility.

With my proposed system the the A-citizens and senate can agree to certain rules for how to govern the country, i call these agreements "senate rules", the constitutions itself should be a strictly technical document imo, a non technical text will be too open for interpretation which makes it pointless.

In order to make democracy work:

If your DNA doesn’t show you as being at least 95% European, you should not be allowed to vote; in fact, you should not be a citizen but a subject.

If your IQ is above average, your vote should count twice as much as those with lower intelligence.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces, your vote should count thrice as much as the baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree, your vote should count four times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree and you have distinguished yourself in any field of human endeavor, your vote should count five times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

Thus speaks nature. This is NOT a joke. No hate here.

http://www.gate.net/~joachim/

Jjack wrote:In order to make democracy work:

If your DNA doesn’t show you as being at least 95% European, you should not be allowed to vote; in fact, you should not be a citizen but a subject.

If your IQ is above average, your vote should count twice as much as those with lower intelligence.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces, your vote should count thrice as much as the baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree, your vote should count four times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree and you have distinguished yourself in any field of human endeavor, your vote should count five times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

Sorry i do not think that would work, it is too democratic. At most 1% should be permitted to vote on important stuff, this is the conclusion i have done after looking at election result and being in contact with a lot of people.

Instead of having different amout of votes for different people, it is better to have a system where people will be able to participate in important election if the have showed capablity, this is why i suggest a system with 3 citizen classes(A,B,C) and maybe have a system with sub classes example: C2,C1,C0 (C0 being best).

If you own 0.0001% of the votes for a company you are not likely to make a good decisions when you vote on stuff. Having to many voting shares will not work well if no one owns a large portion of the company(he will have incentive to make gopd decisions). You might allow more people to vote in local elections(if you have any). If you have a mass democacy where a lot of people have more than one vote the people with only one vote will be demoralised and be even more unlikely do a good job when it comes to voting.

Jjack wrote:In order to make democracy work:

If your DNA doesn’t show you as being at least 95% European, you should not be allowed to vote; in fact, you should not be a citizen but a subject.

If your IQ is above average, your vote should count twice as much as those with lower intelligence.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces, your vote should count thrice as much as the baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree, your vote should count four times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

If your IQ is above average and you have served in the armed forces and you have a college or university degree and you have distinguished yourself in any field of human endeavor, your vote should count five times as much of that of a baseline citizen.

Thus speaks nature. This is NOT a joke. No hate here.

http://www.gate.net/~joachim/

What about physical fitness and beauty?

kaliyuga85 wrote: What about physical fitness and beauty?

It is important for leading figures, you should lead by example, it is also important that we do not give power to people with poor genes(including looks) since they would be likely to oppose eugenics. This is why i be leave the right to vote on important issues shouldn't be given automatically for high income, collage degree or something else that doesn't require good genes or even hard work.

The following citizenship classes should work well. This is the opposite of egalitarianism.

A: <0.02% of the population. Complete voting right including election for new constitution/power-structure. A0=members of the senate. A1=first deputy senator or member of local board. A2=deputy to local board or not first deputy senator. A3=not first deputy of local board. A4=the rest.
B0: 0.1% of the population
B1: selected by >4 members of the senate. 1% of the population
C0: Has performed well. 5% of the population
C1: has successfully completed military service
C2: belongs to our race(at least 95% white).

C0 and above should have partial voting right. C1 and C2 citizens should not be permitted to vote on anything important. A member of the senate of local board should be allowed to choose first, second, third, forth and a fifth successor(in the case something unexpected happens). I call the highest legislative and judicial power senate. The senate might decide that B0 and above will be permitted to vote for or against a new law, the result will of course only be advisory.

I personally do not have flawless genetics, i have myopia problems, difficulty building muscles(ok now after a lot of training) and not all women is satisfied with my face(maybe 50% of the ones in Sweden). Some aspects of beauty(private parts) is not something we should be looking at before giving the A or B citizenship. however i am sure my genes and work for our cause is better than what 99.9% which is enough.

Don't forget, we would also have to have a state religion....I may be able to think of one....

I lean more towards an aristocratic type of system myself but this may all be building castles in the sand at this point. There is a lot of work to be done yet before our descendents can live in peace and build whiter, brighter world.

kaliyuga85 wrote:Don't forget, we would also have to have a state religion....I may be able to think of one....

I lean more towards an aristocratic type of system myself but this may all be building castles in the sand at this point. There is a lot of work to be done yet before our descendants can live in peace and build whiter, brighter world.

Of course it will take awhile before we can implement a our new system, but proper power structure is very important in all stages, from a small organisation to world domination. What happened to National Alliance could be avoided it Pierce had spent more time thinking about these issues. What matters most is of course that the best people have the power, even the optimal system will fail if the wrong people grab the key positions(jews).

Religion is necessary, this is why i like cosmotheism, it is something that should appeal to the best of our people and will hopefully prevent corruption among our leaders. More importantly it is true since it is based on logics and not revelation, the drawback currently is that it is still in the early stage and there is a lot of stuff that we still need to find out, we do not understand consciousness or our universe yet.

The constitution should consist of the basic religion/philosophy and rules for how our country should be governed.

The reasons why people is for democracy is often the following
-they want to be able to influence how the country is governed, of course they cant do that since your vote will only be one of maybe 10 000 000 and it is generally impossible to win elections by having the best politics(you will be forced to appeal to the masses).
-they are afraid of powerful governments, of course this is what democracy always leads to.
-they are failed people using welfare and like to vote for robbing the successful.

If you have a white population of 100M then 3167 will have iq above 160 and 134990 will have iq above 145, if we then choose 15 we can still be very picky even if iq 160 is required. Still some people are brainwashed into thinking letting all 100M vote would be a good idea, then the average iq will be 100(only 50% will have iq above 100) and the only requirement is being above 18.

Some people are afraid of giving up the power to a an elite or a single person, it is true that giving all power to a single or a few persons is dangerous but there is almost no benefits from sharing the power between more than 50000 people, often 1000 people or less is chosen for opinion polls(which usually predicts the election result daily accurate) http://probability.ca/jeff/writing/pollerror.html

Often there is a high social price to pay for expressing views to different from the group, even if it is just putting a paper in a box most people will still be afraid to vote to different from the norm.