Thursday, October 17, 2013

The End Game

I've been thinking more and more about "the end game". Money can't be the end game for governance (really, it shouldn't be seen as the end game by individuals at all).

But the great and mighty leftist elite can be safely accused of much the same thing. Take for example the idea that decisions should be consensus based. It sounds good right? People can chose to participate or not to participate but if they're there, they're heard... or are they?

The system can be gamed. A consensus based system can be held to ransom by a single person. If one person chooses to disagree with everything - ANYTHING - then talk continues and eventually, people fall off. Their voice, their precious voice, is less important than the fly in the ointment. There is no value add to sticking around if someone decides to dispute the meaning of the word "is". If they're not there, they can't have a voice. Thus that one person has an undue influence. Awarded for being a pain in the butt.

In which case, a consensus system does not work. The system is not the end game! The end game is allowing people's voices to be heard (at the moment - remember, when we get there, chances are we'll see a better way). In which case, a super majority system is probably a better idea. This means that while someone may speak and disagree, they must have a certain level of support before being able to hold things up.

I kind of wish our government was based upon a super majority. There's a problem with bills such as the GCSB bill where parliament was split right down the middle. It's an important law that has an impact on all of us and yet half the parties in parliament were not happy with it. The next step here would be a conscience vote. At 90% I don't think we could argue with it which means anyone going against the majority needs to have 10% of the room on their side.

It's not perfect but it works. For example, if someone holds up an entire meeting, you'd need at least 11 people during the next meeting to neutralise that 1 person.

All of this is detail. The important bit is to take a step back. Have a look at what your end game is. Is it working? And if it's not, have you identified the right end game?

Imagine for example I retire and buy a farm (I wish!) but the farm makes me miserable. My end game was never to buy a farm but rather, to retire. So if I'm miserable, I need to go back to what I was trying to do. I wanted to retire happily and have the time to enjoy myself.

It's a journey... The end game is there if only we'd see it rather than getting so invested in "the system"...

No comments:

Post a Comment