CHAPTER 1..... Surfing the Third Wave Something New Under the Sun New Bottles, Old Wine The New Realities Finding Acceptable Solutions Many Paths, One End Define Yourself to Define the Net Teledemocracy Reform Now Controlling the Agenda Computer Illiteracy Securing Communication Lines Heterarchical Anonymity Birds on a Wire, Cash On The Line Revolution or Reform?

Something New Under the Sun For the first time in human history, we have the means to create a virtual democracy, to test it, and to make it real--both locally and globally. At any level of organization, we can model a currently existing democracy, reform the model, and modify the reforms through a highly participative public discourse. We could even vote the reforms into law, if we wished, by a teledemocratic ballot. At any moment or in any place, an individual could initiate a process that would lead to changes in the way we organize our societies--and those changes could occur within a fraction of that individual's lifetime. In effect, we are now capable of planting a seed, nourishing its growth, and--with its full flowering--of transforming the entire world's political and economic structure--all within the span of time it takes to give birth to a single human child. The implications of the new communications technologies are more than revolutionary: they are culture-transforming and species-transformative. As an example, we have the capacity, even if not yet all the necessary scientific information, to initiate a global, democratic discourse on the future structure of the human genome itself. What will the world be like when the startling potential of the Internet dawns fully on the majority of the world's population? Will the daily commentary in different cultures lead to radically different plans for the future of the Internet? Might Internet-mediated worldviews or anti-Internet laws lead to armed conflict? Will governments or organized religions repress political discussions? Could some institutions change too quickly and thereby lose their ability to cope with change? Will rapidly changing communities or nations be isolated by more conservative alliances? Might we become so enthralled by our technopowers and the paradise they seem to promise that we will not take sufficient notice of a deterioration in our vital ecosystems--or in our democracies? Whatever may come, it is time to ready ourselves for radical challenges to our understanding of ourselves, our governments, our cultures, and of the meanings we have heretofore given to life. New Bottles, Old Wine With the Internet, FidoNet, HTML [HyperText Markup Language]-based World Wide Web, and VRML [Virtual Reality Modeling Language] multimedia networks we have dramatically new and easier ways of communicating. The costs of information access, sophisticated processing, and of publishing ideas globally are markedly lower and diminishing. Content is less subject to control by the large corporate interests that dominate other forms of mass media, though fear of shadowy forces and of future government intervention lurks behind many Internet messages. And for a variety of reasons, we tend to pour the same old patterns of information--and the same old habits of thought--into the lines between us. Thus we have HomePages that extoll the virtues of commercial products, of services for sale, or of candidates who are building on the old pattern of political careerism by campaigning on the same old premises. We have voting pages through which we can ``vote'' on almost any question--without affecting the realworld. And we have ``Usenet'' groups. There are networks for sharing information helpful in carrying out environmental or other progressive--or regressive--political campaigns--but almost always within the old and usually corrupted realpolitik framework. Unfortunately, staying within the old framework leads to a cycling back and forth between traditional liberal and conservative perspectives--both of which are tied to the money and power of wealthy special interests. And all of this leaves us drifting further from realities that could threaten human existence. At some moment we, or our children, [but not our grandchildren because that would be too late] will have to decisively declare our values--and change both the structure and the content of democratic decision-making. For better or worse, the Internet will be a significant part of the process. The New Realities Noteworthy among the elements of our developing world system are the following: the relative importance of material force, including military power, is diminishing the relative importance of information, knowledge, and communication is increasing the binary superpower structure based on the models of national sovereignty and blocs of nations has collapsed. Regional trade-blocs and a global network of smaller communities are growing authoritarian, fundamentalist, and totalitarian systems--though surging here and there--are in decline and will eventually be relegated to a past age the patterns of corruption and injustice found in the sovereign democracies are also undergoing transformations forced by the increased difficulty of keeping secrets in the age of information; consistent with this, political careerism is beginning to fade existing governments and those who benefit most from the old order will continue as long as possible to promote current hierarchies, closed or sovereign systems, and local political/religious/cultural/linguistic chauvinism, but a new communications network is already in place and is evolving quickly toward a more complete foundation for the next, much more open and egalitarian, global system many insightful people are already skeptical of the realpolitik worldview defended by the ``old order'' and are now searching for a new model worth building, but the existing level of the general public's understanding still lags dangerously behind the technological, economic, demographic, ecosystemic, military, and political changes that are taking place, and some of the trends in ecosystemic, economic, and military realms will lead to crises within the next fifty years that will threaten all civilized societies and even the ability of the human species to survive Whether we can adapt to all these new realities in time depends in large part on the confidence and sense of responsibility in those of us who become aware of the situation before its too late to act. It is clear that those who accept the corporate-dominated worldview or who sit in endless fascination--absorbing the exciting new information that rolls by on computer screens--will, like birds on a telephone wire, do nothing while chaos builds in the streets below. Finding Acceptable Solutions The problem we face as a species, and particularly as early birds on the wire, is that of first becoming aware of the situation as described above. Secondly, we need to notify others of the developing crises, and then--most importantly--we need to agree on a model for solving the problems. In these endeavors, the Internet will be indispensable. However, the pattern of single, isolated measures, and single-issue movements, which may salve the individual conscience for awhile, will no longer suffice for society as a whole. The problems are already too big and too complexly interconnected. We are now at a major fork in the evolution of human civilization. We must define and choose between full scale socio-economic models that are unsustainable and those that are sustainable. Fortunately--as if to demonstrate a law of evolving complexity--the arrival of big, complicated problems is soon met by new means of coping with complexity. We now have computers connected to each other around the world, penetrating almost every society--and we have people in every part of the world who know how to use computers and networks to model complex problems and their solutions. Just as importantly, we have millions of individual computer users who can work at a less technical but more value-oriented level. These individuals, working at home alone, in groups, or in classrooms can also develop new, problem-solving approaches. Many of these will bypass the use of computers for profits, or for purely personal pleasures, and will apply their computer-amplified powers to the resolution of major social problems. Many Paths, One End Although it has been observed that a ``third wave'' of democratizations is taking place around the world, many existing ``democracies'' actually have little in common with one another beyond their generalized pretenses. To complicate matters further, there are different versions of the democratic idea that work better in different times and places. Most people would agree, however, that we either need to reform existing ``democratic'' systems or find new models to replace them. We could, of course, work on both of these simultaneously. In this manual we will assume that we can work both on reform and on creating new models of democracy, and we will assume that both approaches could be eased by intelligent use of the Internet. However, we will also adopt the premise that McLuhan was only half right, that the medium is only half the message, and we will attempt to ensure that the medium, i.e., the Net and all its glittering gear, does not distract us from that which has most meaning and value to us--life and the love we have for real persons large and small who make our lives worthwhile. To make a real difference in the world, however, we would each have to define and declare our values, then join with others who share those values and take action. We would have to proceed on the basis of an well-organized program for change, and we would have to begin soon. We would also have to begin to understand the Internet and its role in human evolution. Define Yourself to Define the Net In media portrayals of the chaotic but astonishing growth of the Internet, the focus is generally on the rapid evolution of ``amazing'' technology and on the dazzling speed and convenience with which more and more people will be able to access large amounts of information and communicate with each other in the future. The discussion usually proceeds, unfortunately, without recognizing that the patterns of the Internet are extensions of patterns in the human mind. The Internet itself, being a large grid of multi-connected nodes, has--like the human brain--a high degree of totipotentiality. In distinct contrast with traditional mass media, each user has considerable ``interactive control.'' Thus, each individual or group can define and regenerate at any time both the structure of that portion of the Internet that will be used and the virtual identity that will be adopted by the user. To define ``the Internet,'' therefore, each user must also achieve self-definition. Nor can the Internet be clearly understood without reference to the larger world. To achieve the full potential of the Internet would require definition by all users working as one whole system with a defined purpose. Prior to that stage in the evolution of human systems, various subdivisions of humanity will use the Internet to improve their competitive or cooperative positions vis-a-vis other groups. Thus the evolving structures of the Internet are related to the many simultaneously existing stages in the evolution of human systems. We can only make sense of the Internet by making sense of ourselves in relation to our evolution as individuals, as groups, and as a species. This includes making sense of our virtual selves. One schema which is useful in understanding the evolution of complex systems--for example, democracies, the human brain, and the Internet--is the syntropic systems paradigm described in a previous book. The essence of the syntropic systems idea is that systems in general evolve through stages toward greater self-organization. By constructively defining a model of self-organization and stages in the evolution toward that model, we provide ourselves with a framework for characterizing or defining any complex system and evaluating its evolutionary progress. Utilizing the syntropic framework as our model, the overall structure and evolution of the Internet is revealed. Despite its digital mode of processing information, it is now primarily an analogical system of schematically communicating computer programs--operated, of course, by a variety of human systems that function at various levels of deep evolutionary organization. The possibility of creating virtual selves offers each user--and the Internet--a chance to clarify his or her(it's) own evolution of ``personality.'' We should remind ourselves frequently that the hardware/software portion of the Net, shorn of its human components, is lifeless and does not intrinsically care one whit about the value of human life. It is given life, and will serve life, only to the degree that humans use it to serve themselves, each other, and other living systems. It could also serve to destroy life and particular human cultures. The potential of the Internet, therefore, remains dependent--up to a point--on human potential. Humans have the potential of creating new forms of life, however, and then of relating in a variety of ways to those creations as the creations begin to define themselves. The ultimate value of the nonhuman portions of the Internet will, therefore, be determined not simply by the way we value ourselves as individuals, as groups, or as a species--but by the eventual outcome of the Internet's successive stages of evolution toward its own self-organizing and self-reproducing identity...and, of course, by our reactions to each of those stages as they evolve in the future. For now and the near term, the principle value of the Internet will be determined by whether we choose to make it serve an expansion of democracy or allow it to subserve primarily special, commercial, and sometimes violently competing, interests. The remainder of this book is devoted to the task of improving the probability that the Internet will enhance progress toward authentic democracy and that it will--through extensions of genuine democracy--further human life and its evolution toward democratically selected goals and values. Teledemocracy Computers with high speed modems and optical fiber networks make ``teledemocracy'' appear likely, and global teledemocracy much more feasible, in the first half of the 21st century. Research will produce a procedural strategy that could facilitate the transformation of liberal democracy to more advanced forms of democracy, reduce the costs of democratic government, and help reduce the problems associated with wealthy, special interests and their deceptions. The following is only one possible scenario for developments ahead: 1. If the representatives in government consult with a wider variety of people more often regarding more issues, then the functions and purposes of democracy could be more adequately served. Further, if these consultative exchanges could be done quickly, democratic decision-making could be more richly endowed with the wisdom of the whole electorate. Democracy could thereby be more adaptively intelligent. The only real obstacle, aside from the general lack of education in democracy, is the present inefficiency of communications and information processing. Because of this logic, searches will be made for more efficient means of carrying out the processes of democratic government. 2. The necessary efficiencies can be accomplished by means of advances in the understanding of the Internet--especially computer parsing of semantic information. Here the medium is a message: computer nets offer humanity a significant evolution in the democratic process; a world-wide, electronically based democracy, a global teledemocracy, could be achieved within 50 years. 3. First, NGOs, perhaps local or national governments, will begin the experiment. Training in schools, in adult education classes, political party offices, and in the home will create a computer-ready group of participants. Along with the distribution of the hardware and software components, a system of incentives for participation will be established. Next, with the strong support of member nations (and with a gentle push from NGOs), the U.N. could create a special commission to study, fund research, and facilitate a global education in preparation for global teledemocracy. Where economically more feasible, teledemocratic systems will be established in smaller electoral districts as pilot projects. First local computers, then regional and eventually global networks of supercomputers will be set up with memory sectors organized for neighborhood, community, county, congressional district, state, national, and world decision-making--all communicating with each other through a subset of the Internet: the teledemocracy network. 4. Interactive terminals, radio antennae, satellite dishes, or optical fiber cables will be located in homes, worksites, bus and train stations, airports, businesses, public communications boutiques, libraries, post offices, DMV offices, and all government buildings including schools and hospitals. Small handheld, interactive communication units could be connected to the network. Voter registration or absentee ballots could be updated electronically by citizens who change residence or who travel abroad. 5. Each eligible voter will have a personal identification (PIN#) number and a ``smart'' ID card--[all-purpose, may also work as a credit card, health care card, transportation ticket, ticket card for theater, symphonies, sports events, ``eco-credits,'' ``work credits,'' etc.] This card could be inserted into telephone, TV, or computer terminals and updated with stored copies of voter transactions. Voiceprints, voice recognition, automated translation, and speech synthesis technology will further facilitate confidential communication and security within the teledemocratic network. 6. On the computers at any one time there will be several issues (more when systems can handle it) that are being discussed and/or decided, locally at first, eventually at each of seven levels of government--community, city, county, state, nation, continental regions, and world. 7. Periodically, each voter will be eligible to state a preference on any particular issue and to register that preference or comment on the network. Registering a preference, however, is not yet a final vote. Rather it is information that helps legislators become familiar with developing public opinion. 8. A running total of preferences and summary of comments will also be available on interactive display screens, in newspapers, and in magazines. These will be periodically updated and will include graphic, animated displays to show trends. 9. A record of activity on each issue, to include the number of new preferences, totals, number of changed preferences, the gender, ethnicity, race, age, occupations, residence area, party affiliation, country, etc., would be automatically calculated by the computer which also protects the identity of the voter's ``secret electronic ballot.'' Public records can be periodically published on screens and in daily papers. 10. The whole process will have to be available to the citizens of every country in several languages. Esperanto, it will be discovered, is an easy to learn second or third language that is a logical choice for a global lingua franca. It can function economically as an intermediate language for computerized translation systems, and it provides one important answer (among the several needed) to objections of cultural imperialism. 11. When discussion of preferences begins to slow down or stabilize at some level, or when other factors make it necessary to end deliberations and make a decision, the elected representatives may then choose to call for a vote and make the decision. Some issues may be decided only by the legislature after consulting public opinion. Other issues may be decided by teledemocratic referendum. Nothing would be final until elected representatives approve it--unless by law or decision the legislature leaves the issue to the people for a final vote by a specific date. Legislative methods for choosing a time frame for the decision-making can easily be extended from the floor of the legislature to the electronic forum. Following the above outline, some issues will be decided, not be the legislature, but by direct vote of all the people in an electronic referendum--with ratification by the courts. 12. Through teleconferencing--using interactive television/computer terminals, explanations, discussions, and positions on the issues would also be available in easy to understand, multimedia formats on the network. Any individual could inform her or himself and contribute an opinion--with some format provided so that the opinions could be integrated into a ``hypertext'' version of the ongoing ``telelogue.'' With automatic parsing of inputs and text construction, ``hypertext'' related words or ideas will provide background information or related statistics, and reveal how many people support this or that wording of a bill and why. By this means the actual language of the bill could actually be written by a teleconferencing process to which each person could contribute--with specially trained legal experts monitoring and perhaps rewriting for final presentation to the voters or the legislature. The legislative agenda and its priorities could be established by the same process. 13. Elections could also be finalized by teledemocratic voting. Telelogues, with candidate's positions clearly and specifically stated according to campaign rules, could continue through the course of a campaign. Voters could find answers to their questions at any time by interactive connection to the teledemocratic network. Through the use of computer codes, encryptions, voiceprints, and software records, voting fraud could be completely eliminated. 14. In order to keep democratic participation ``live,'' that is emotionally colored by face to face contact, people would meet in small groups or community assemblies for workshops and discussion of the issues. Incentives to participate will be offered as ``credits'' which can be exchanged for work hours or small sums of money financed through a system of personal teledemocracy accounts established with contributions from all sectors of the economy. Each person could register preferences from their personal, handheld voting device while at the meeting, and an ongoing feedback display could inform people inside and outside the meeting of changes in opinions and moods. Candidates for elective office, of course, would still make their presentations at live meetings as well as through the media. In order to avoid undue influence by special interests, it will be more important than ever before that financing of elections should be organized by the methods stipulated in The Universal Model: A Democratic Constitution for the Third Millennium [Foreman, 1995] and in chapters three and four of this manual. 15. Since this whole process could be almost completely automated and computerized, legislative representatives will eventually be elected primarily to supervise the electronic data processing and to formalize the decisions made by the whole people using their teledemocratic network! Special interests could no longer buy votes, and with changes in the ownership of mass media, they would no longer dominate the flow of information about the candidates and issues. Electoral fraud would be effectively eliminated. Corrupt congresspeople would find it more difficult to hide behind secret votes and obfuscating legislative procedures. A modified direct democracy could be accomplished, first on local, state and national bases, and eventually on a global scale. Peoples and nations would finally be united on a peaceful, democratic basis while still retaining their thriving cultural, ethnic, and racial identities. 16. Mathematical strategies for improving the correlations among the results of voting procedures and the actual will of the people--incorporating the will of minorities--could be done automatically by the computers with printouts that openly display the methods, calculations, and results. Those who believe that ``democracy'' should not be in the hands of the people, and those who believe in true democracy, would finally be confronted with the full implications of their beliefs. Antidemocrats and their special interest affiliates would be clearly revealed. The question, ``To democratize or not to democratize?'' would finally have to be faced completely. The above scenario, which may appear utopian by today's standards, is likely to be approached on a global basis sometime before the mid-21st century if a ``critical mass'' of education, a worldwide distribution of hardware components, and further advances in democratization can first be achieved. A teledemocratic world system, though competing for scarce resources during a time of economic, demographic, ecological, and sociopolitical crises, could still become one of the most effective means of resolving those crises. The prominent role of technological innovation in the above example should not be taken to mean that advances in social evolution always follow or require technological change. In the transition to a ``syntropic'' stage of democracy, as described in the book Creating Democracy In Time [Foreman, 1994], technology will be significant but the ideas and consciously chosen purposes of democratically united communities will be the most important factors. Reform Now Significant reforms can be accomplished before the onslaught of global crises if enough people get behind a few strategic, initial changes. In this process the Internet has a special importance, for by no other means can a very few determined people have a more rapid or profound effect on the future of the world. Simultaneously with the reform of existing systems, there could be an effort to create small (Internet-based or other) model democracies that organize themselves on the basis of a few human values that will, in any case, later be necessary for human survival in the 21st century. These models would have to: (1) demonstrate respect for all cultural and racial groups that exist among humans by finding more effective ways to democratically integrate majority and minority opinion, (2) recognize and distribute fairly the economic limits imposed on us by the environment, (3) respect not just human rights but also all basic human needs including a need for meaningful work, (4) base themselves on a minimum, universal set of values and goals that will carry us beyond our immediate, self-fulfilling needs, and (5) seek as a long term goal the political unity of the human race, while conserving individual and community autonomy, in a global democracy that aims to eventually extend human life beyond the planet Earth. Some communities have already begun this process. They would undoubtedly welcome more help. Others interested in this approach may wish to create new communities from the beginning based on the model constitution (see chapters three and four). Thus two approaches to social change will be discussed in this manual: one would be to reform existing democratic structures directly, and the other would lead indirectly to reform by first creating new democratic systems that would function in parallel with existing ``democratic'' structures. Both approaches can, and should, be undertaken simultaneously, and both will have to be strategically designed to move us toward an ideal democracy for each unique cultural or historical context. The strategy will be to provide suggestions for people who live in any human society to participate in either reform or in the creation of new democracies that can join the larger and growing network of small democratic communities. Since both approaches lead to the same goals, throughout this book it should be clear that whatever path one chooses--if the recommended steps are taken--the end result will be progress toward a democracy that approximates the type and form described in the proposed model constitution. Controlling the Agenda One glaring problem with current political usage of the Internet is that almost every site or node is controlled by individuals or interests that are selected--not by democratic means but--by local group or individual fiat. The agenda at each node generally reflects this fact. Where this is not entirely true, the structure and content of interaction is usually single-issue oriented and determined in advance by a small, unelected group that assumes authority to act, and often does act benevolently, on behalf of a larger community of interests. Examples of the latter include groups communicating on econets, peacenets, greennets, or similar progressive, nonprofit networks. Each of these networks has valuable contributions to make. They primarily function to speed the sharing of information and other resources that can be used by various political movements to work toward their goals. It should be made clear, however, that these networks and nodes are generally not, themselves, democratic in their process. Although their values and real world political contributions may be significant and highly commendable, it ought to concern all of us that they may not be using their electronic medium in a way that promotes further democratization of human societies. Discussion and selection of ``the agenda,'' for example, is fundamental at every level of democracy. If the agenda at any node, or of any group communicating through computers and modems, is to be democratically determined, the following must occur: a voting population must be democratically defined a meeting, or computer conference/usenet group/bulletin board must then permit discussion of an agenda, and either an agenda is decided by a vote of the whole population, or a person or persons is elected for a limited term and democratically delegated responsibility for selecting the agenda a secure method of electronic voting must be established a method of recall and of popular referendum on any existing agenda must also be in place the cost of this whole process must eventually be borne by the self-defined population of voters In the startup phase of any democratic community of voters it is almost inevitable that one or a few individuals will donate time and energy or wealth (computing resources) to provide the initial platform for discussion. At some point the resources of any such unelected person or group will either be exhausted or will begin to limit progress toward a full democracy. In any case, democratic control of communications media is absolutely essential if subversion and control by special interests is to be avoided. Eventually, an elected Media Council--replete with funds, an operating budget, and limited terms of office--will be necessary if the community is to develop and sustain confidence in the democratic nature of its decision-making. A Media Council would have regulatory responsibilities for all communications media owned or operated within the community--if the model constitution is accepted. Computer Illiteracy Many millions of people have never seen a computer. Nor have they easy access to telephone lines, cables, or satellite stations. Yet their direct perceptions of the natural world are often extremely valuable to our understanding of ourselves and of the global ecosystem upon which all human life is dependent. The movement toward an Internet-based global society, therefore, must be accompanied by a serious effort to reach out to all non-Internet connected people. We will have to make a conscious and determined effort to avoid the present two-tiered world of computer literacy and illiteracy, of haves and have nots--out of self-interest as well as respect for all peoples. Latter day Luddites in modern societies also have important contributions to make. The world agenda should not be long in the hands of only those who have daily use of computers. Let us remember that the perspectives of people whose worldviews are developed without undue influence by the new virtual realities might even be wiser in some important ways than the cognoscenti of the latest new wave. The art of living in unvirtualized reality remains relevant. Computerization of many aspects of the human world, however, seems almost inevitable, and computers must at least be made available to the innocent as well as the jaded. Public access to computers in libraries, communications boutiques, coffee shops, railroad stations, health clinics, or in private worksites and offices should make it possible for most interested parties to join a computer-facilitated, democratic discussion--though it may be necessary to lead some by the hand until they are as ``well-connected'' as the rest of us. Ultimately, access to computer networks and to the agenda-forming process comes down to a question of values--as is true, of course, of the formation of the agenda itself. If the values of the group are truly democratic, then a way will be found for all members and sincerely interested prospective members to participate, directly or indirectly, in the development of the group's agenda--and of the global agenda. If the group's values include a genuine concern for both the opinions and the well-being of humanity, they will also want to have a beneficial impact in the real world. Computer-conferenced decisions, no matter how democratic the process, cannot sustain respect unless they carry weight in material reality. Real-world problems have to be confronted, and real-world solutions have to be found and implemented at some level of society. To sustain interest, the decisions of every teledemocratic community must soon offer tangible benefits in the material lives of the participants as well as in the world around them. This implies, regrettably for a few of us, that some face-to-face meetings will eventually have to occur, and some personal wealth will have to be invested in the process of creating wired, democratic communities. Having decided in advance (via the Net) on a mutually agreed upon minimum value set, however, such meetings and shared investments ought to turn out a lot better than the average venture from the safety of one's own workstation. Some proposals for a minimum set of values can be found--with parts of the model for an improved democracy--in chapters three and four of this book. Expanded versions of these models, along with discussion and rationale, can be found in two previous books. Securing Communication Lines The Internet, like any spontaneously gathered crowd, is not set up for organized decision-making on a large scale. Both its charm and its potential are related to the fact that it is a very large, open system capable of expanding through, over, and under the barriers put up by traditionally closed political systems. Only a determined and well-organized human effort will make a portion of the Internet useful as a communications system for a truly democratic community. As open, wild, and chaotic as the electronic marketplace is now, however, it offers the future possibility of a separate, organized sector for political decision-making that will make even the modern, well-run legislature look like an unruly mob by comparison. Shrouded voting booths and closed-door committee meetings have their counterparts in the firewalls, codes, encryptions, and separately wired networks of electronic communications. The fidelity of transmissions among members of any self-defined group, and of the vote on any issue, must eventually be secured by such means. Encryption of all messages may or may not be necessary in all stages of teledemocratic formation, however. It depends ultimately on the presence of hacker pranksters, electronic terrorists and thieves, and computer-sophisticated anti-democrats or enemies of the minimum value set shared by the community. The use of codes, firewalls, and separate networks should be determined by each group or community as it progresses. A secret ballot, paralleling an open vote on the same question but using codes and a different node, may be useful in determining whether someone is tampering with the group's teledemocratic process. In any case, each participant in a teledemocratic group ought to select a code name and/or a Personal Identification Number (PIN) that could be used for verification of any transmission. Any vote would thereby be a secret ballot--unless, of course, there are elected persons and technicians who have the responsibility of maintaining records and codes. Complete confidentiality, a fundamental democratic right for individuals, will be achieved by separating encrypted vote messages from the encoded access messages, so that the process of accepting the message is entirely detached from the deciphering and counting of the vote messages. Heterarchical Anonymity One of greatest advantages of the teledemocratic process, and an important source of its creative advantage over earlier stages of democratic process, lies in its capacity for subserving virtual meetings among virtual participants. Thus a conference of equals can more easily take place, shorn of such cognitive irrelevancies as hair styles, dress, nervous tics, facial complexion, and personal reputation or charisma, than at any previous time in human history. The power of each message can thereby rest primarily in the beauty of its logic and the harmony of its relation to context as well as to the problem at hand. Inhibitions to creativity that are inherent in face-to-face transactions, of course, are also inhibitions to fantasy and the sublimely ridiculous. It is possible that outlandish decisions will sometimes be made by an Internet-based group process that borders on the psychotic, but of course, that happens in real world, face-to-face leadership groups as well. Ultimately, except with regard to voting processes, it is even irrelevant whether virtual meetings include computers, robots, or any other simulated human participant that might pass the explicit or implicit Turing tests. Modern, realworld political process with its simulated sincerity has already demonstrated that we can survive the potential absurdities of a virtual democracy. What counts now is that real human participants of an authentically democratic community attain genuinely democratic control of the politico-economic process before its too late for us to create a sustainable world system. The ``secret'' of success for any secret electronic ballot--indeed, for the role of any virtual, anonymous, or backroom decision-making process in a democracy--is that it be subject to review and vindication (or rejection) by those live human citizens who would be affected by the decisions and who are working together toward shared, democratically-selected, values and goals. Birds on a Wire, Cash On The Line The creation of a democratic community is greatly enhanced when the costs are shared and some property is jointly owned. Fortunately, it is now possible to transmit ``cash'' and credit card information with a high degree of security over portions of the Internet. (But be careful! The currently allowed encryption systems are not in effect everywhere, and nowhere have they demonstrated permanent and perfect security.) We can send information that has been encoded on one's hard disk by a bank to someone else's hard disk. That information symbolically represents hard cash that can be deposited or withdrawn from real life bank accounts. By this means the members of a wired community can purchase goods that can then be received electronically, via snail mail, or by express delivery. The costs of commerce associated with traditional forms of energy-consuming transportation will eventually be much reduced. As soon as possible, fledging flocks on wires should begin both virtual and real savings accounts. Savings, accruing from dues and individual investments, should then be used to purchase some realworld anchors for the wired community--coffee houses with computer terminals, Internet server sites that also serve nonmembers, software development groups, publishing companies, or any other real property that might be of value to both the democratic community and its ambient population. From these anchors, programs or movements for political reform or further community-building can be networked. These technologies, and these savings, can thus be utilized by the new teledemocracies to facilitate real world development in other spheres--perhaps for reform or for the creation of other new, teledemocratic communities. Revolution or Reform? Sooner or later, every society that perceives itself as needing change must confront the question that is, or ought to be, fundamental in the mind of every political activist. In the past, and in various parts of the world-system today, the answer will be more difficult to determine. In the modern world of the high-tech, police-backed nation-state, the answer is clear. Violent revolution against a modern industrial state, even one that cruelly masquerades as a democracy while murdering those who protest, is unwise and too costly in terms of human life. A peaceful transformation to a more genuine democracy, either slowly by a series of reforms or more rapidly by massive popular acceptance of a new constitution, is the only solution. And, because democracy is necessary to the achievement of most other human values, the transition to greater democracy must itself be carried out democratically. And there is no more important task facing humanity today. Violent attempts to overthrow the modern state are simply not a reasonable option, nor is violence against any institution or individual member of modern society. Corruption and authoritarianism must be replaced--but only through nonviolent action undertaken with courageous hearts and clear minds and only to attain democratically selected, morally justifiable, and adaptively intelligent ends. In this manual the reader will find a description of a new model for democracy and for a peaceful, democratic method of transition. More information and theoretical background on the modular approach to a new, constitutionally-based, democratic order can be found in the previously mentioned books [Foreman, 1994 and 1995]. In the following chapter, we will look at a brief outline of a program for incremental reform. Next chapter...