• UK-relevant news NOT reported by the BBC
• No regard for child welfare - Cameron's policies actually proliferate child abuse
• Cameron and paedophile friend blocked UNICEF-supported PA child protection strategy
• Mainstream media blocking the People's Administration direct democracy party
Should the UK choose to reform to direct democracy now by using existing laws and without revolution or, should the People's Administration win the next UK general election, a new administration [not another government] will be formed. All party manifestos will be merged into an on-line database and the people will become the decision-makers regarding ALL policy implementation [including their own] via an on-line voting system. Majority-voted policies will then be implemented into law by a reformed Parliament and so through direct democracy, the people will govern the people.
The Greeks invented democracy [not 'representative' democracy] and even without the web, the Greeks decided upon ALL laws and, the inventor of the web himself [Tim Berners-Lee] says; "The web is not as powerful as it could be. We need to learn to use it to solve our problems."
The faster empires break-up, the better-off we'll all be because hundreds of new cultures [regional tribes] living side-by-side with their own direct democracies will simultaneously bring true democracy to the world, while preventing any centralised world order.
If elected, the PA's direct democracy manifesto will NOT be implemented into law. Our manifesto is purely a list of proposals that we would put to the people for potential amendment and/or implementation into law in a UK direct democracy.
Government = Guverno ["to control"] and Mentis ["mind"]
By creating and establishing a peaceful, legal, UN-sanctioned, non-revolutionary template for reform to direct democracy, we have now achieved ALL of our political aims - it's now for you to choose whether you want true direct democracy or not and the answer affects you, not us [we're musicians - not politicians, so don't need your vote]. If you choose to vote for direct democracy, you do it for you because you believe in and demand true and direct democracy.
Under the current system of so-called 'representative' democracy, only those who wish for Parliament [a minority] to make decisions on their behalf are catered for and even then, it is ONLY the aspect of electing politicians that is open to them but, democracy is about far more than just electing so-called 'representatives'. With direct democracy, those who wish to take responsibility for their own country's laws can do so while those who prefer representation can still be represented - by the people [the majority]. If for any reason you do not wish for your fellow countrymen to make policy decisions, then it is not democracy that you support because 'democracy' means 'rule of the people', not 'rule of the state' or of any other minority.
MP Anne Widdecombe stated that she would "never let majority public opinion voiced on my website influence my parliamentary votes and I would never let voters make decisions upon policy implementation." Before realising who he was talking with, MP George Galloway told the PA founder directly that "Direct democracy is the best way for the country to go!" adding "You could get rid of all us lot too." confirming that we can have what hypocritical politicians admit is best for us but, only when it doesn't compromise what's best for them.
The only MP to recognise and to publicly call for direct democracy is Labour's Kevin Brennan who in 2012, told a Hansard Society event at Westminster that; "Technologically it is now possible. We could function as a direct democracy. The cost of obtaining people's views on a range of different subjects is miniscule compared to any other time in history, unless you go back to ancient Greece when you just gathered in the market place and you could have a direct vote on things."
When voting on the issue of UK military intervention in Syria [Aug. 2013], only 44% of MPs voted against it while acknowledging that public opinion was approx. 80% against and, 14% of MPs who couldn't be bothered to represent their voters abstained. Generally, 40% of MPs say that they have no power because they have to vote in alignment with their party 'leader' but if this group of MPs had voted to represent the public, it is no coincidence that the Parliamentary vote would have been approx. 80% against - in alignment with public opinion.
However, even when MPs do remember their sworn duty to represent their voters, it is considered a 'rebellion' if they vote out of alignment with their party 'leader'. On the 30th January 2014 and after a slapping-down by David Cameron, so-called 'pro-direct democracy' Tory Douglas Carswell announced that he will "never rebel again." while party colleague Anne McIntosh announced that she would run as an independent but, she announced this only AFTER being sacked by her local Tory office [for 'rebelling'], confirming that Parliamentary parties DO NOT represent you.
All of this demonstrates that MPs are victims of their own power - acquired through defunct political architecture which rewards those who consciously choose NOT to represent you and so, direct democracy will enable full and direct representation.
Even if they were willing to represent, elected politicians are in the minority within the UK Parliament which consists of 650 elected members [House of Commons] + 830 unelected peers and bishops [House of Lords] and so, the UK is not a representative democracy by any measure and is actually the only remaining theocracy in the Western world.
Even if they were willing to represent, with direct democracy via web and telephony, representation is no longer required and with direct democracy, we can save millions every year by reforming Parliament and we could also start to reduce the social and financial pressures that force us to focus purely on surviving, and we can start living.
With direct democracy and without centralised decision-making, the politicians, the media, the religions, the unelected lords and consultants [such as multi-millionaire Alan Sugar], the corporates, the banks, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers and hidden organisations [shadow governments] of any nature can not manipulate the power any longer, as the power will be with every individual.
Trusting politicians was always a risk but because of direct democracy, it is now an unnecessary risk and if we consciously take unnecessary risks, it is inevitable that we will suffer. With direct democracy, you do not have to understand Parliament or to become a politician to run the country. You just have to upload your potential solution for anything of concern and/or [it's your choice], vote on other proposals of interest as and when you feel like it [making politics both fun and fair] - a reformed Parliament will do the rest.
In a direct democracy and within a reformed role that removes the undemocratic 'right' for only politicians to vote upon policy implementation, any remaining politicians would have no motive to implement propaganda campaigns regarding any specific issue because they would no longer exclusively represent the potential for any specific policy to become law so, mainstream news propaganda would cater only for the desires of network proprietors. Currently, mainstream news propaganda caters for both politicians and proprietors and while this is highly beneficial for them politically and commercially, this also gives cause for both to work together to keep the people and the state politically divided between left and right, us and them. In a direct democracy, the people would be better-informed and therefore more united and so, decisions regarding policy implementation would potentially yield greater benefits.
Partisan politics kills! Partisan issues cause ALL civil and military wars globally because, only politicians vote for war where entire nations wouldn't and unlike politicians, the armies, intelligence and security agencies and the people have now learned that violence brings no sustainable solutions regarding influencing other people's decisions.
The first country to reform to direct democracy will be the world's first democracy [system of rule of the people] since the concept died due to invasion in its ancient Greek birthplace. Its economy and its people will benefit massively just for being known as the world's most democratically advanced civilisation and if we in the UK are so culturally advanced, why are we wasting this opportunity when we've had the technology and laws needed [since 1991] to legitimately remove Parliamentary policy decision-making? How can we claim to be advanced in the use of either democracy or technology while we're abusing both to the detriment of ourselves and the rest of the world [England still has political, cultural or military influence in approx. 90% of the world's countries]? This is not the attitude of an advanced and responsible civilisation that is claiming to be living through an 'Age of Enlightenment'.
The People's Administration's constitution for reform to direct democracy and our voting protocols have both been sanctioned by the UK Electoral Commission and the UN. In a general election, the People's Administration does NOT have to field candidates to secure your vote on the ballot paper. Outside a general election, you can vote for a legitimate reform to direct democracy now by following the PA Direct Democracy Twitter blog @self_rule
It's your choice - will you continue to use your existing freedom to empower a corrupt minority that costs the UK economy millions every year, or do you want true, efficient, decentralised, UN-sanctioned direct democracy? So-called 'representative democracy' is financially inefficient, democratically void and non-evolving, while decentralised direct democracy is the only true democracy [system of rule of the people] and, direct democracy as a form of governance would save millions every year.
Some say that direct democracy is tyranny over the minority but, as the nature of direct democracy is based upon self-rule [the ability to make our own choices/freedom] and decentralisation, it can never be direct democracy itself that is flawed and can instead only be the laws that people choose to implement with it, that can be flawed.
We've also had a minority [Parliament] making all of the decisions - often now voted into power by a minority [due to lack of turnout] and it has failed to represent either, instead representing itself and big businesses. It is giving absolute power to the minority that is and has always been the only tyranny. Those who say that direct democracy is tyranny over the minority also deny that 'representative' democracies and theocracies ARE systems of minority control. In a direct democracy, minorities would have exactly the same access to democracy and power as majorities would have.
Direct democracy is simply the mechanics that will enable for the people to have true democracy [to have the rule of law] - that's all. No system can be blamed for the policies that people choose to implement with it but, direct democracy is the only system that enables full public participation regarding policy implementation. Blaming direct democracy for any potential negative results from any laws that may be implemented is no different to blaming a car for crashing instead of blaming the diver. Any problems that arise will be the result and fault of the policy itself - not the fault of the system that implemented it. When cars crash, we ban the driver - not the car.
If ten men vote to rape five women, it is the men's thinking that is at fault [not democracy] and evidently, this particular objection to direct democracy is only expressed by those who think as rapists do - blaming the act of rape on anyone or anything but themselves. Incidentally, if UK voters cared about rape, why are they directly funding the rape of pro-Assad women and children across Syria, when very UK tax payer has the legal right [since 1215] to with-hold tax payments if they feel that the government is abusing their money?
In fact, direct democracy would allow for the potential for rape victims to potentially reclaim some power by influencing the formation and implementation of related laws - making-up for areas where the current system continually fails them.
For those who believe that direct democracy is dangerous because it enables the potential for abstract thinking to become policy, in a direct democracy, the majority can define these terms and, the majority being able to decide upon the viability of policies is what ensures that a direct democracy itself can evolve and, policy amendments and reversals can be implemented within hours and, at very little expense.
We are musicians, producers, artists and political activists [not politicians] who have registered the People's Administration with the Electoral Commission as a mainstream UK party [since March 2010] with the ability and architecture to implement a reform the UK to direct democracy - should the majority vote for direct democracy now or in the next UK general election.
Despite the mainstream media's knowledge of the People's Administration's founder [Alex Romane] authoring documents [published by the world-renowned British Library] regarding Political Architecture and Religious Theory, previously working directly with David Cameron [independently] prior to establishing the PA, working on the Mid-East Peace Process directly with the PLO, creating a potential £2 BN aid package for Somalia, forecasting and trying to prevent the UK riots, creating government-adopted policies, creating a potential solution for rising sea levels and diminishing water stocks [with TV presenter and inventor Trevor Baylis] and creating sustainable solutions for the economy and for democracy itself, the mainstream media will not feature the People's Administration simply because we stand for direct democracy and people politics over representative democracy and partisan politics and, they have told us this directly.
PA Affiliate Movie: United Initiative
Includes interviews with Alex Romane [PA founder], Mike Gravel [US Presidential Candidate] and others.
In our opinion, American foreign policy is the second biggest threat to global security and with direct democracy, the UK would no longer be America's 51st state because direct democracy would allow for independent foreign policy implementation.
With direct democracy, China [nor any other regime] will no longer be able to threaten and bribe our corrupt and weak Parliament into bending our domestic policy.
Approx. 50,000 animal and plant species become extinct every year [which threatens the food chain and substantially reduces the potential for finding medical cures] because we choose to empower those who refuse to prioritise protecting our life support system, instead of choosing to take responsibility ourselves through direct democracy.
The issue of supplying clean, safe, free and endless energy was resolved in the 1930's by Nikola Tesla but thanks to US and UK politicians, neither you nor your children would have learned of this at school because the men who run the US presidency also run the UK government and guess what... they're all up to their necks in oil! During 2001-2010, out of 111 energy proposals put before the US Senate, 5 became law. While none of the abandoned proposals involved oil consumption, all 5 of the accepted proposals did involve oil consumption.
In early 2012, scientists discovered that ants and bees specifically use direct democracy and furthermore, they apportion their use of direct democracy as being fundamental to their efficiency and overall survival. In the words of the UK scientists that carried out tests on ants;"The colony's use of direct democracy greatly enhances its survival because it decentralises the decision-making which increases its ability to find better solutions faster." Since 2012, it is emerging that most, if not all social-group species use direct democracy.
Politicians are not problem solvers. They are generally from a media or legal background and neither professions involve any training in problem solving. It is engineers, technicians, scientists, philosophers, therapists, authors, artists, teachers, analysts and others [the people] who are natural problem solvers and, only direct democracy can allow for the people's ideas to become reality.
Without direct democracy, their ideas will remain oppressed.
Mass hemp cultivation can end global deforestation while offering multiple other benefits to our health and the economy but due to political reasons [not environmental or economic reasons], our freely-elected UK 'representatives' lack the intelligence [using hemp is common sense] and political will [pandering to the uneducated voter is no way to lead a country] and so refuse to allow UK farmers the right to grow it - despite hemp now becoming fully legalised across the US and despite Canada now using it to build cars and more. We are actually choosing to be held-back by partisan politics and its so-called 'representation' [while the UK secretly cultivates opium just for pain killers].
When the 'Great' British people continue to vote with their money and to vote with their ballot for continued oppression, why does the UK population then complain and protest about the effects of its own decisions? It would be far more strategic for single-issue protest groups to vote for a reform to direct democracy now, than it would be to continue with begging, fighting the police, and other indirect action.
The Greek people chose to empower 'representatives' who spent more than £150 BN on arms [more than the bail-out] over the previous 10 years whilst failing to collect taxes from the rich. Since austerity was imposed, the Greeks could have chosen to reform to direct democracy but instead, they chose to protest - and now their 'representation' has been replaced with unelected administrators, they have lost their legal right to protest, journalists are being arrested and Greece is now on the verge of civil war.
The UK is the ONLY remaining theocracy in the Western world and direct democracy would be the most efficient way of ridding common law of religious law because direct democracy would automatically remove all centralised religious influence from Parliament.
[More info: Direct Democracy and Religion]
Direct democracy is the only democracy and, direct democracy would enable whole civilisations to take full social responsibility for their country's policies and actions.
The reason for why terrorist organisations target civilian populations is not because civilians are soft targets [as Western governments constantly tell us] but is instead actually because ultimately, it is the civilian population [the majority in any country] that is responsible for its country's system of governance. If a population chooses to shirk this responsibility and to leave all decisions to 'representatives' who the civilian population freely choose to empower, then how are civilian populations not part-responsible for the causes of terrorism?
This is also the philosophy behind why Western governments use sanctions against countries and this is why we also regard government-imposed sanctions placed upon any country as a form of terrorism.
Only terrorist organisations are responsible for their actions and while acts of terrorism can never be justified, the civilian majority is though ultimately responsible for the influences and policies that their freely-elected governments promote that give terrorists a cause and, a reason to exist. Why do you think it is that only certain countries are targeted and that out of these, US and European countries come-off worse? It is not due to 'bad luck' [there is no such thing because everything happens for a reason].
It is our absolute belief that the solution to ending ALL global terrorism lies in shaping foreign policy around how we ourselves expect to be treated, while educating the extremists of how their God has no needs.
Whilst we have the ability to make choices, we are free and we have power. With our existing freedom, we have chosen to empower people who can't solve problems and we have got what we voted for. Now we can use our freedom to vote for self-empowerment via direct democracy.
We believe that social unity can only be achieved with direct democracy, where the UK electorate can create, propose and vote upon all policy implementation.
An evolved culture of politics
Within a direct democracy, the police and the law courts will be enforcing truly democratic laws as determined by the people and as long as the people view and target the police themselves as the enemy, we will remain a divided and weak nation, unable to stand-up to a corrupt UK Parliament because, it is Parliament's laws that the police enforce - not their own. In a direct democracy, the police will be enforcing the rule of the people [democracy], social cohesion will be greatly enhanced and it is because of this that police personnel from across ALL forces already quietly support a reform to direct democracy - they're still waiting for you to demand it.
The People's Administration was formed in early 2010 only after politicians and party leaders [including David Cameron] with whom the People's Administration founder has met and worked with offering voluntary independent consultation, rejected pro-democratic policy ideas despite them having over a 90% approval rate when put to voter groups by the People's Administration's founder.
The People's Administration recognises that the political axis has rotated and is now drawn between the people of all countries uniting through direct democracies, and the minority who seek to control. The people of the world now have more in common with each other than they do with their own 'leaders' and, despite the People's Administration's architecture for direct democracy being promoted in various forms since 1998, it is now being studied as a template by various groups in other countries.
Economics: The People's Administration believes that 45 million eligible voters advised by the Institute of Fiscal Studies via direct democracy, is better than 3 heads advised by their party donors.
The previous two global financial collapses both led directly to world wars. Unlike the previous two world wars, thermo-nuclear WW3 will leave no functioning environment. Our representative democracies and our markets are now thinking and behaving in exactly the same ways as they did in the lead-up to both of the previous two world wars and it is no coincidence. A global reform to direct democracy is now the only sustainable solution.
Crime: With direct democracy, we could increase the economy whilst decreasing crime rates by legalising black markets and enhancing prisoner rehabilitation programmes - particularly Restorative Justice programmes.
Parliament's 'revolutionary' idea to make 'Digital Britain' the world leader in IT is to upgrade network infrastructure with new cables. The People's Administration's idea to make Digital Britain the world leader in electronic communications is to upgrade Parliament with Electronic Direct Democracy.
The 'mistakes' that led to hundreds of voters across the UK being denied their right to vote in 2010 would not have happened if voting by web and telephone in a direct democracy had replaced the expensive, inconvenient and out-dated method of voting via mismanaged polling stations.
The cost of the AV referendum in 2011 was £250 M. The People's Administration estimates that if administered on-line, the entire referendum could have been ran at a cost of less than £10 M - further demonstrating the coalition's absolute complacency towards technology, the UK economy, the UK electorate, and direct democracy.
Direct Democracy and Cyber Warfare [published since 2010]
It is the nature of human beings to make our own choices [to be free]. Therefore, direct democracy and self-rule is in our nature. Physicians, politicians and military planners now accept that in any circumstances, the power of resistance always eventually equals the power of oppression so eventually, direct democracy will be the culture of politics and the People's Administration's reform to direct democracy could be a positive aid to this transition.
It is an illusion that the people don't already have power. Whilst we don't believe that we have power, we abuse it. When politicians tell us that they want to give us more power, they reinforce the notion that we don't already have all of the power and the illusion is maintained but, only because we do not real-ise that we already have ALL of the power [the ability to choose to vote to maintain a theocracy, or to choose to vote for the People's Administration and direct democracy].
Money is not power. Money enables for the ability to make more choices but can never be used to control others without others in some way choosing to be controlled. This makes money power-less. It is freedom [the ability to make choices] that is the only power. The People's Administration has no financial support, yet the People's Administration has the ability to legitimately establish direct democracy in the UK - should you choose to empower yourself by voting for direct democracy.
This People's Administration's direct democracy proposal is a mechanism through which the people can come to know through experience, that the people already have all of the power, and to then exercise this power for the positive by choosing to reform to direct democracy.
Within a direct democracy, as well as voting upon all policy implementation, the people themselves will also be able to propose policy ideas directly to the country for a potential national vote and implementation by the People's Administration and a reformed Parliament.
If you support democracy [majority rule] in any form, it would follow that you would at least want for the majority to decide if they want to take responsibility via direct democracy - unless you also are as a politician, seeking to oppress the majority simply to satisfy your own fears?
How are the people educated enough to decide which government will control their lives, but at the same time not educated enough to make far less fundamental decisions? Within a direct democracy, it would be the responsibility of the author of each policy to educate the voter and the responsibility of the voter to make a choice - should they choose to.
If you are considering not voting, spoiling your vote or voting for 'None of the above', why not make your vote stand for direct democracy and parliamentary reform by voting for the People's Administration and reform to direct democracy?
Voting for direct democracy outside a general election
It is up to us, the people [not the politicians] to use the power that we have always had, to choose to implement direct democracy as soon as possible.
This is not a protest campaign.
In accordance with Magna Carta Article 61 and with UN UDHR Article 21 and with all democratic principals up-held by the UN [which the UK is signed-up to], the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog is a UN-sanctioned and legally recognised voting format for UK reform to direct democracy - even outside a general election.
Vote legitimately for a peaceful and structured UK reform to direct democracy now simply by following the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog and when numbers reach a point of critical mass, we'll do the rest.
The People's Administration's constitution for reform to direct democracy and our voting protocols for implementing direct democracy have both been accepted by the UK Electoral Commission and the UN as legitimate. In a general election, the People's Administration DOES NOT have to field candidates to secure your vote on the ballot paper. Outside a general election, you can vote for a legitimate reform to direct democracy now by following @self_rule