Principles of Good Governance Part 2
- Truth.
The truth is important above all things. Without the truth, there can be no clear guidelines for a society to develop.
All Public servants, corporate officers, public persons and politicians must tell the truth at all times while acting in their position. This should be legislated and enforced by civilian oversight, otherwise it will be abused systemically.
This discussion is dedicated to the truth. It is quite simply the most important thing that we as a society can possess. Unfortunately, it has been corrupted, bastardised, twisted, by most of the governments, companies, media organizations, even churches in the world. Governments particularly pretend to be there for the benefit of the people. Very rarely is this the case. Governments are generally there to line their own pockets. If they can do some good along the way then they are generally happy to do it, so long as there is no threat to their primary aim - which is to stay in power, and make money while in power.
There are many, many areas within our lives now where the truth is corrupted. There are military secrets, police secrets, in fact governments, companies, churches, organisations on all levels absolutely refuse to divulge information about what they are doing, why they are doing it, who they are doing it to (or with), unless they are forced to in a court of law, or in extreme circumstances by the court of public opinion.
Citizens on the other hand have their entire lives laid bare for anyone in any government organization to see. We now have throughout the western world and increasingly the entire planet, a system of information sharing whereby anyone in any government department can access your entire history. The possibility of you accessing government information is absolutely forbidden, under penalty of imprisonment and massive financial penalty. For a private person to access government information databases is almost impossible – everything is classified as private, everything is classified top secret, so governments behave however they want to from behind a wall of silence.
If we don’t return to being a society of truth, where the truth is available to everyone equally, then we are going to continue down this path to destruction. It will end in nuclear war, it will end in continued acts of terrorism. We are already at that point, it is only a matter of time before “Terrorists” get their hands on a nuclear device, or a significant chemical weapon and release it into a large population. The reality is that governments have caused the problem. It is 100 percent the result of governments interfering in peoples’ lives, destroying peoples’ lives. If your family was killed, maimed, destroyed, if your livelihood was taken from you, who wouldn’t become a “terrorist” and fight back.
There is a very famous saying that “one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist” and that is really all we are faced with today.
The mainstream media (as a tool of government) continually makes people out to be crazy, to be “terrorists”, to be mentally deficient or twisted people. I suggest that the vast majority of people who are labeled “terrorists” have simply become so because their societies, their families, their significance on the planet has been degraded, attacked, eroded to a point of desperation.
So the first thing that we need to do at all levels on our society, not just private citizens, is to demand that the truth be told.
In all of the western countries, probably in most countries, it is a very serious offence for a civilian to make a false statement to a government official, company, or any person of supposed authority. When you fill out a form for a drivers licence, for application for any of the hundreds of permissions that you need to live a normal life nowadays, when you are being questioned by a police officer or judge, if you tell a lie or mistakenly give wrong information it can have very serious consequences including imprisonment for significant periods of time.
The flip side is however, the police can say whatever they want, they can do whatever they want; prosecutors can say whatever they want, you have no recourse against their accusations; public servants, politicians, even large companies get away with lies and deception on a level that private citizens never could.
In Queensland, Australia, it is only within the last few years that it was made illegal for a politician to lie in parliament. Politicians are still permitted to lie to their constituents, but it was made an offence to lie to parliament. Politicians can lie to civilians, they can lie to the media, they can lie to whomever they want to – just not to parliament. Prior to this (and it was only a few years ago that the law was passed) politicians could even lie to parliament. I wonder, what made them change their mind?
The big question on this point is – Why is it permissible for a politician to lie to their constituents, but not to parliament? The entire purpose of a politician’s existence is to represent the constituents of their electorate. It would be far more correct in practice to make a law prohibiting a politician from lying to their constituents.
I don't want to sound like I'm government bashing but the fact is that the government is the largest entity in most countries and certainly the one with the most control over the population. There are a very few organisations such as Google and other huge multinational companies that even come close to the number of employees and participants.
Considering this, the principles that we are discussing here apply equally to large corporations, small corporations, public entities, churches and any organisation that influences the public, controls any part or action of the public, or takes funding from the public in any way. It is very important to note the incredible damage done by corporations and public figures such as Enron, Bernie Madoff and Exxon.
For this reason it's very important that not just politicians be included in legislation that requires the truth to be told. All public servants should be included in this legislation from the smallest and most insignificant position to the highest. Equally, all corporate and public persons (radio and television presenters included) should be required tell the truth at all times when acting in their position or commenting in the public arena.
For far too long people in positions of massive public influence have been allowed to present personal wishes, opinions and even blatant falsities as fact, often to an audience of millions. By these lies, they have managed to sway public opinion, promote false propaganda and even influence elections.
It is fake news on steroids!
To give a perfect example of this, an election in Australia was critically influenced by the publication of a nude photo of a person resembling the candidate just a few days before the election. The newspaper in question stated in writing that the photo was of the actual candidate. Some time after the election the newspaper admitted the photo was not of the candidate and paid a token sum in compensation. There should have been a criminal investigation on the basis of illegal interference in an election but of course the party who won the election did not pursue the matter and the candidate who lost could not do much without the support of the government.
If laws were passed binding the media to the truth travesties such as this would not occur.
There are very many instances of police violence and criminality, but the police are extremely reluctant to investigate or prosecute one of their own even when their indiscretions are caught on video.
There is an unwritten law in all police forces that they never charge or prosecute one of their own.
Just being friendly with local police is often enough to protect a criminal from prosecution. If police were bound to the truth at all times and subject to civilian oversight and prosecution when they broke the law, cronyism and corruption within the forces would be much more difficult to hide than it is today.
It is true that very often laws requiring the truth are in place, but particularly in cases like this the government, police or other entity which has power simply will not prosecute. For this reason it's incredibly important that civilian oversight is granted as part of the legislation. In the case where normal citizens outside of the influence of the participating parties have the ability to prosecute the crime the possibility of corruption or cronyism is severely reduced.
Civilian oversight can be arranged in many different ways. It can take the form of elected civilians, a complaints hotline, or by allowing civilian prosecution in matters of corruption or the public misconduct of an official.
I am of the opinion that civilian prosecution should be permitted in all courts with the sole condition that a suitably qualified lawyer or barrister is employed to ensure that the relevant legal requirements are met. Why does the government have a monopoly on seeking justice? If a civilian is aware of a crime, should they not have the right to see that the wrongdoer is brought to justice?
This simple Act would in itself reduce corruption in any country where it was introduced. Not only the government but all of the services such as police, corporations, churches, etc would no longer be able to hide behind cronyism and influence in the courts.
Just as civilians are required to obey the law when they are unable to bribe or corrupt police, so too would police and other officials be required to obey the law because they cannot bribe or corrupt civilians.
In western societies it is almost impossible to bring a case against police, lawyers, politicians, public servants or people in positions of authority because the system that protects them simply will not allow cases to proceed. If civilian prosecutions were permitted, all of these corrupt individuals would be accountable for their actions and society would be significantly better for all.
Paedophile priests and child abusers within government organizations throughout the Western world during the entirety of the 20th century are a perfect example of how people in positions of power are protected by their friends, colleagues and the organizational structure itself. Very recently, it was exposed that a large group of United Nations Officials were running a paedophile ring in Haiti. No-one was jailed, no charges were laid. Government officials are specifically protected by laws to prevent them being prosecuted for these types of crimes.
Where the laws of a country or organisation permit this behaviour to go unpunished, the lawmakers are themselves complicit in protecting these criminals and others who use the system in the same way.
If a country anywhere aspires to have an honest and equal population, then the leaders of that country must demonstrate honesty and equality in all that they do and say. Having one rule for the political elite and anther for common citizens will not work. Expecting citizens to respect the law when the lawmakers are corrupt, violent liars will not work. Make laws that are equal for everyone, and then enforce the law for everyone equally. By doing this politicians will gain the respect and trust of their people and enjoy many more terms in government.
Lead and your country will follow, fall behind and they will scatter in a thousand directions.
Yours Sincerely,
Ian, citizen of planet Earth
Upvoted and followed.
I think anarchy is the best form of governance, for reasons that you touched on. No one group should be able to profess to have a monopoly on violence, for one.
The definition is important -- "an-archy" i.e., no ruler, just as "mon-archy" is one ruler. Not "no rules"; "no rulers". Nobody is above the law, like those lying politicians who now can't lie to parliament.
Truth is important above all else. We can handle the truth. Thanks for this.
Thanks for your positive comments.