With this belief, we shall take control
If you’ve been watching the news lately, you have probably noticed the latest belief invention: “The elections are rigged!” The Republicans (sometimes referred to as the know-nothing party) are now amassing an army of like-minded volunteers to monitor the voting booths in an attempt to place doubt in the public minds about the fairness of the elections. These climate change-denying, pro-gun, anti-vaxxer, don't say gay, end-of-time, holy voters are getting aggressive with their lies, and it’s not the first time. 100 years ago, the bible-dazed ancestors of many of these Republicans were deeply humiliated after the Scopes Monkey Trial, an American legal case about evolution being taught in schools. They made themselves look like uneducated hillbillies. They’ve had a personal vendetta against evolution ever since. These people just can't win in a court of law that requires evidence and reason, so for the last 100 years, they’ve resorted to an ongoing smear campaign to place doubt in people's minds about evolution. In addition, they've taken control of school boards and school bookmakers in an attempt to replace science with religion. Now it looks like they're at it again, only this time—it's our democracy they're hijacking!

But before you judge the Republicans, look at the social beliefs the Democrats are perpetuating, like the dogma that race and gender are purely social constructs rather than a genetic and biological reality. Also, investing huge amounts of resources into education, which sometimes is ‘accept me as I am’ propaganda; stretching the boundaries of freedom with an omni-sexual, multicultural, social celebration; and downplaying differences in intelligence by lumping everyone into the same group. The subjective belief that we are all equal, which started off with good intentions many decades ago with former President Lyndon B. Johnson’s heartwarming Great Society Plan to help the underprivileged, has taken on a life of its own and grown into a social phenomenon with the sometimes frantic craze of destroying stereotypes. Among other things, this has resulted in career grabbing.
Also, indiscriminately welcoming massive numbers of immigrants from Central America into the country while turning a blind eye to this culture's incredible birth rate and their refusal to give up their old culture and language and integrate. I heard one Latin man from Mexico tell a news reporter in California, “Wake up and smell the refried beans; this is our home now." The Latin population—15 million in California—now outnumbers white people here. Judging by the avoidance strategy I see other groups of people using with regard to this Latin demographic, not everyone is happy about this.

Note: There's a mismatch of common traits between the US and the Latin world in contrast to the US and Canada. The trait that matters the most is an average IQ difference of about 15 points. It's foolish to ignore the very real consequences of this sensitive topic in the name of politeness. When we’re talking about more than just a few immigrants (3-5), common sense says: This is a bad gamble. Although intelligence cannot sum up the value of a whole person, it is important enough to not look the other way. A person with arm muscles twice the size of average is about twice as strong as average, but when it comes to brain muscles, you must multiply by a factor of 10, and everyone’s IQ is important, not any one race or group (see The Jerry Springer Show). Low IQ is a key factor that results in weak self-control, high birth rates, social disorder, future desperation, and eventually anarchy as the world becomes increasingly crowded. Because of excess population, we lose our quality of life: walking on a secluded beach or mountain trail, enjoy the smell of a wood-burning fireplace, experience moderate weather, drinking non-sewage reclamation water, and so on.

It would be tempting to scapegoat a whole group of people for society's problems, but that wouldn’t be fair or helpful. The less desirable and the limited should not be vilified—because it’s outside of their control. It’s as if evolution comes with a built-in no-fault clause.

Both the Republicans and Democrats have the same needs, but squabbling over their subjective beliefs and narrow perspectives (treating abortion as if it were anthrax, for example) blinds them to reality and blocks them from devising a realistic, sustainable, once-and-for all solution that addresses the root cause of problems. Political beliefs can have a satisfying psychological payoff that fulfills a person's tribal need to belong to a group he or she can identify with. This evolutionary need is likely produced by one or more of these three imperatives: dominance, mate selection, or territory.

The dishonesty embedded in these well-intentioned social beliefs, along with the fear of being labeled with a career-ending social stigma word from a growing politeness word arsenal, only discourages wise decision-makers from participating in leadership positions. What’s needed to resolve this is an arena designed to promote those citizens capable of objective thinking and constructive disagreements, not subjective beliefs and blind social following.

In a nut shell
The United States is now behind the power curve and has lost its credibility as a moral leader. The problem is that the elected representatives represent the voting citizens, but there are more foolish citizens than wise citizens, and therefore the elected representatives cater more to the fools than the wise. A Promocracy will promote the wise to greater voting power.

Voter Promoter Election System
Introducing a new form of government I call a Promocracy, meaning to promote. The Promocracy will capitalize on the more honest and knowledgeable citizens and promote them to greater political power. Each citizen's voting power will vary based on potential; more on that later.

Important concepts
Objective: an interest in the truth, and the truth for the greater good.
Subjective: an interest in believing that which serves self-interest.
See Principles: Objective and Subjective

Common Sense: ordinary sensible understanding; no specialized knowledge required.

Principles: follow the principles, and more often than not, things have a way of working out.

Career Grabbing: for example, a recruiter visits a college to convince a minority woman to pursue a career she had no prior interest in and would only awkwardly fit into, thereby forsaking a latch-key generation young man who had his eye on that career since he was little—leaving him struggling to find a purposeful alternative. The career was that of a Coast Guard helicopter rescue pilot. The minority woman quit after only a couple of years. I saw this in a news video.

Behind the Power Curve: a concept from aviation meaning an airplane is losing altitude even when the engine is producing maximum power.

Dominance, Mate Selection, and Territory: Evolution's engine that drives behavior in all humans and other animals. See Basic Instincts: Basic Instincts Example: A Chinese spy balloon drifts over the US. What does this mean? Maybe it’s payback for those American spy plane flights over China in the 1960s. Maybe the Chinese leader is saying, The US make China feel small for last 100 year; but your controversies have made your democracy slow and confused—no match for autocracy." Now you shall all agree it's time to give up your petty individuality. Learn to make do as automatons and serve the Chinese Communist Party, or we will infect your society with deadly form of Feng Shiu. This is evolution’s expression of dominance and territorial imperatives. Intentional or not, the balloon may be a metaphor from the Chinese, indicating that we’re going to make you feel how you’ve been making us feel.

Socialized Beliefs: beliefs people are encouraged, or sometimes as children, brain washed into believing by a more powerful or dominant person or group (parents, church, school, teen friends, media, military, job, marriage, etc.). Often the motives are derived by fake leaders who are more subjective than objective (those who are too emotionally invested in their beliefs and consequently cannot update their beliefs based on new facts). When misguided, these beliefs can lead to intermittent spells of false conclusions. You’ve probably noticed intelligent people who sometimes have poor judgment when their beliefs conflict with reality. All of us are guilty of intellectual slippage from time to time. However, society is filled with belief automatons who are not able to change their minds. It might take a brain-quake to force some people out of their beliefs. If you’re a thinker instead of a believer, your life might sometimes seem as if you're living out the movie Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Some thinkers have to live double lives, like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, to prevent their parents from hyperventilating if they find out their child is thinking outside the social circle.

Expired Beliefs: beliefs that are hundreds of years old or older and that were never intended for people in modern times to follow. Example, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth, and subdue it.“. Mission accomplished; you can stop now!

Elephant in the room: an enormous issue that is obvious and everyone knows it, but no one mentions or wants to discuss. For example, for more than half a century, the US has needed a tall wall along the US/Mexico border to keep immigrants from crossing the border illegally!

Stakes: the winners have a lot to gain, and the losers have a lot to lose. When the most needed or desired resources become scarce, the stakes are high. When the stakes are high, people’s objectivity thins out, and they develop greater emotional investment in political parties.

Note: I am not a political scientist or an expert in how government works. What follows is just my perspective. One person's perspective should not be the sole source to draw upon for understanding a phenomenon or designing a new system. I welcome those who can contribute in ways I cannot.

What’s wrong with American democracy?
1. Socrates (born 470 BC), the founding father of Greek philosophy, was skeptical of democracy, explaining that only those who thought rationally and deeply should be allowed to vote. Socrates thought that if everyone were allowed to vote, fake leaders would be elected (those who pretend to have the right answers through the use of persuasive social politicking skills). Need I say more?

2. To a certain degree, the elections are corrupt. The voters don’t actually get to decide much. Only a tiny fraction of the population—the economic elites and organized interest groups—decide who can run for office, and then the voters choose which of those preselected candidates they want. A citizen does not get to participate if his or her ideology differs from the two controlling political parties. Democracy is mostly an illusion.

3. After over 200 years since American democracy began, the world has grown complex and dangerous, requiring objective thinking abilities more than ever to make voting decisions. Meanwhile, the average voter in the United States is subjected to the brainwashing effects of socialized beliefs of the kind that polarize citizens into two dominant political parties. These two controlling parties stop any other ideology from participating.

Democratic: Let us all be equal party on the left.
Republican: Jesus will save us, party on the right.
-------

A Napkin Sketch Design

Converting American Democracy to a Promocracy
Introducing a new form of government I call a Promocracy, meaning to promote. A Promocracy is a bionic Democracy. The Promocracy will capitalize on society's advanced thinkers (those citizens who are judged to have a greater potential for possessing objective thinking ability and realistic ideas) and promote them to greater political power. Each citizen's voting power will vary based on their potential; the greater the potential, the more influential their vote will be on election day. More on that later.

This new form of government could be run similarly to the United States democracy, with a number of significant modifications:

1. Let's face it! Many of our elected leaders are not exactly idea machines. That’s due in part to the following three reasons:

a. Currently, politicians have to be of the people-pleaser personality type to even have a chance at being elected.

b. Social correctness and religious beliefs severely limit freedom of thought.

c. Too many Washington leaders have spent the better part of their lives narrowly focused on social politicking their way to positions of power by achieving a degree in law or political science, instead of taking the long road to discover the principles of reality embedded in the world and learning scaring lessons about inequality from decades of struggle and hardship navigating unassisted through the school of hard knocks.

For these reasons, this new form of government will experiment with an
idea capture system by crowdsourcing and co-creating ideas from its citizens, not just its elected leaders. I could be wrong, but I think former President Obama included an idea into his Obama healthcare plan he may have discovered watching a TED talk. If so, that's what I'm talking about.

The presidential administration could announce a problem that needs a solution; for example, what to do about the lingering Venezuela crises, China’s planned invasion of Taiwan, or mass shootings? Then give a large number of volunteer citizens who qualify for a particular political class and grade six months to research, sleep on it, put together a plan with a very short video presentation, and submit it for the administration to review. After review, the administration will send back the plans they think are closest to the solution with comments on what problems the administration still foresees needing to be resolved. The citizens will go back to the drawing board for round two with a shorter deadline. Then do this again if need be, and so on. Through this process, a realistic plan with actionable steps may emerge, and everyone involved might be forced out of their circle of beliefs to consider the perspective of others. This could solve hard problems and relieve gridlock.

The president should feel free to ask one volunteer or group for help. For example, what would Marilyn Vos Savant, the person with the highest IQ, have to say about a particular problem? Is she just good with logic puzzles, or can she make a brilliant contribution regarding other hard problems? Wouldn’t you like to hear her perspective? Maybe she’s noticing something no one else is! The president should also feel free to offer a bounty in exchange for good ideas or insight that might help the country.

2. There will be no primary elections or caucuses to select party leaders and narrow down the pool of candidates who will run for office in the general election. There will just be a general election (electing the president every 4 years and congressional house representatives every 2 years). There will be no campaigning, fundraising, political conventions, debates, or popularity contests. This will save tens of billions of dollars every election year that only rich candidates or candidates with social connections can afford to pay. This will also prevent corrupt foreign governments from treating our democracy like a smash-and-grab when they donate money to candidates in an attempt to influence our elections. The potentially high number of citizens running for office will be filtered by the promocracy grading system. If there are still too many candidates, a lottery will be used to randomly narrow down the selection pool. The selection pool will only have high-quality candidates because of the prior work of the promocracy grading system, as explained later.

Candidates will explain their ideology and layout their plans in a short video presentation (under 8 minutes) and post it for a small fee on the hypothetical future electoral college website, explained later. The emphasis will be on the issues and ideology, not the candidates or political parties. The candidates cannot show themselves in the video. A candidate's attractive looks and social politicking skills should be de-emphasized. If candidates advertise themselves for the election, they could be disqualified.

A promocracy will not line up a group of candidates on stage in a televised debate. A debate is nothing more than a game of verbal nunchuks—the one with the most charismatic white teeth wins. This has a tendency to promote those who have excellent social politicking skills: those who rely heavily on the “fake it till you make it” assertion and have an innate or skilled ability to talk, smile, or handshake their way through life, bridging over all of those “school of hard knocks” insight-building learning experiences some of us spend decades enduring. It also welcomes a mouthful of smoke and mirrors logic, window-dressed narcissism, vague talk-arounds that are light on details, and verbal attacks from competing candidates. Debates appeal more to the gullible armchair voter who enjoys the gladiator entertainment and expects to be serenaded one way or the other, as opposed to the serious thinker who can spot a fake leader a mile away. It would be wrong to blame the candidates. This is just what the political arena has evolved into in modern times. Fixing this arena will make it more likely that less-talkative candidates like former president Calvin Coolidge can be elected.

It would be better to have something like a televised committee hearing to interview each candidate alone, one at a time, to discuss the candidate's background, ideology, plans, and what issues they think are important. A panel of judges trained to be open-minded to new perspectives will interview and explore the candidates ways of thinking and ideas. The candidates cannot be vague or dodging with their explanation. Political correctness should be discouraged in favor of efficiently providing realistic understanding and ideas. It’s OK to be wrong, and apologies are unimportant. The goal of a promocracy is to collaborate and promote the best understandings and brightest ideas, not just the candidates. If a candidate is not elected by the people into office, their ideas might still live on and even be drafted into Congress to be used in governing decisions if the voters prefer.

Note: I have personal experience presenting plans to city committees. I was impressed that the committee I submitted my plans to has knowledgeable advisors that will both critique and defend my plan based on the advisors knowledge and experience. This is objective. This should be the default behavior of voters and political leaders.

Also, I have noticed in the world of design that the best end result is sometimes derived from the freedom a collection of smart people have to chime in with their 2-cent opinion to add to or chip away at the sculpture of a plan. It’s best that the original designer not become too emotionally invested in his or her idea or plan. I think this is one of the reasons the original Star Wars trilogy was so much better than the prequels.

3. The first-choice voting that exists today should be replaced by ranked-choice voting. This will break up the two-party system and allow other parties or an independent candidate with a unique ideology an opportunity to participate and let his or her ideas be heard.

4. Replace gerrymandered congressional districts monopolized by one member of Congress with the Fair Representation Voting plan. Instead of a geographical district mapped out in such a way as to ensure a member of Congress is guaranteed to win a seat, the district will be mapped out by an independent commission and be larger to accommodate more than just one representative from Congress. Each state will keep the same number of representatives, but the representatives will share larger districts instead of controlling a small district all to themselves. This will help break up the two-party-polarized Congress and give an independent thinker a chance at winning a seat in Congress. Since campaigning has been discontinued, House members of Congress will have more time and fewer expenditures in their short two-year terms. This will solve the complaint I have heard some house members make. Lastly, discontinue the lifetime pension for all Congress members.

5. The electoral college will be repurposed from a group of officials who elect the President into a group of educators and judges who promote citizens to higher political positions. This is where the promocracy grading system works.

The electoral college will have three responsibilities: promote, demote, and educate.

a. Promote: judges and aides will search for citizens who have made an effort to better themselves, have paid their learning dues as a consequence of the circumstances of their lives, or have demonstrated their objective character, knowledge, and ideas through published works such as books, videos (YouTube, TED), etc., and promote these citizens by issuing them political points for their political grade. It's kind of like a miniature Nobel Prize.

b. Demote: Public figures can be demoted for grossly disinforming their followers with obvious falsehoods, long-shot claims, propaganda, conspiracy theories, or indoctrinating students with irrational beliefs. Examples would include: claiming an election is rigged; poor people are poor because they’re irresponsible or immoral; referring to those people who support transgender operations as pedophiles; denying climate change; promoting—the world is coming to an end; masks and vaccines are not needed because God will protect us; or religious belief disguised as education. Often, hidden agendas and personal payoffs can be found in people making such claims. The goal here is not to fact-check every social influencer’s statements; we are all allowed to be wrong. The goal is to identify false leaders or political parasites and discourage the abuse of free speech, which is rampant in the US. A few examples of other types of demotions are listed below in the Earning Points section.

c. Educate: The electoral college will offer a two-year course to learn how the very uncommon “common sense” is covered up by the brainwashing effects of socialized beliefs. Learn the difference between belief and knowledge, how to uncover motives and spot people who deceive themselves, the difference between discrimination and arbitrary discrimination, and how to have constructive disagreements. Learn the skills of voting, logic, and critical thinking; how to put subjects into perspective and judge their importance; risk management; It’s OK to be wrong, and it’s OK to be confused. There is no shame in learning. Learn how to learn, how to investigate, and how a scientific theory works. Learn how to grow ideas and become more visionary. Learn to collaborate, not compete. Test your curiosity and willingness to understand. Memorizing information long enough to pass a test (typical school) is not enough to graduate from this college; only true learning, not rote learning, will lead to the issuance of political points.

Candidates for all positions, including committees and judges, must be high-grade (600 points) citizens and have graduated from the electoral college. Candidates must have been US citizens for 20 years prior to their election. The president, vice president, and supreme court justices must have been born in the US. Candidates will no longer have to be a celebrity, have family or political connections, have money, be Christian, married, or be a social butterfly to be elected to leadership positions.

6. To prevent election mold from setting in, make elections a two-month process, not two years. The introverted country of Sweden can do it! Why can’t we? And at the start of the new presidential term, when the newly elected president predictably issues his executive order: to slam on the proverbial breaks, reverse course, and undo everything the previous party did in the last administration (to the amusement of foreign adversaries), consider toning down that lavish star-studded gala-glitz Election Win Inaugural Ball extravaganza ceremony. Fluffy social functions are likely to repel serious thinkers from seeking leadership positions. Ask yourself this: would Carl Sagan choose to attend such a tuxedo function because he really wanted to?

7. Maybe the roles of the House of Representatives and the Senate should be as distinctly different as extrovert and introverted personalities (C3PO and R2D2). Thanks in part to the invention of the television, the election advantage has gone to C3PO. Now there are too many C3PO’s and not enough R2D2's. But of course we need C3PO’s in the House of Representatives to communicate directly with the citizens regarding their present-day needs! Maybe the Senate should judge how the way in which these needs are fulfilled may affect the future (more of an R2D2 thought process). One example is the American car company Chrysler versus the German car company Mercedes-Benz. Chrysler tries to please stock investors by focusing on how much money a new model will bring the company next year (a C3PO interest). Mercedes-Benz focuses on what a particular car model will evolve into 10 years from now (an R2D2 interest).

While we're on the topic of Congress, get rid of that silly filibuster. Having a talkathon to break up a stalemate is literally unreasonable. It’s an influential rather than analytical way of thinking. It reminds me of my high school government class... watching the popular boy and the class clown dominate the exercise with their quick verbal wit and Filibuster demo, while the more sincere analytical types were reluctant to participate.

Lastly, add term limits. Maybe: (7 terms, 14 years) for house members, and (3 terms, 18 years) for senators. The maximum number of terms should be long enough to allow a member time to learn their job and get really good at it. That’s about 10,000 hours, or working full-time for 5 years, but not so long that it blocks younger generations from participating in these elected positions.

8. Air Force One! Do we really need it? Is it just a gasly expensive ($200,000 an hour) status symbol of American pride used to impress the average voter with a temperament equal to that of an excited contestant on The Price is Right? Can’t we just use telecommunications? Is a face-to-face handshake photo op with a foreign leader really necessary? Is it possible that the mighty Air Force One makes some foreign leaders feel small?

9. Excessive media scrutiny. The president should not be put on the spot, thus needing a spin doctor to defend himself in a media conference. Would George Washington put up with this? I’m not suggesting we cancel Saturday Night Live, but often there is a swarm of news reporters with a barrage of criticisms and the occasional loaded question. This environment would discourage wiser leaders from participating because a president needs to manage mental resources and minimize distractions to stay focused on solving hard problems.

10. Finally, stop swearing on the Bible. It appears as though a fear device must be used on newly elected leaders before they enter public office. This also indicates that American democracy is actually, to some degree, a Christian theocracy in disguise. Maybe the Freedom From Religion Foundation can help with this.

Voter Eligibility
A citizen must be able to read and understand the English language so as to be informed. English-speaking countries have freedom of the press. News organizations are free to investigate and report the facts, and by the way, there should be news organizations on the local level to help spot corruption.

Intelligence Quotient (IQ) test:
Voters must prove their competence. A citizen must have an IQ of 100 or greater to be eligible to vote. Citizens with dyslexia are exempt.

Promocracy Grading System
Registered voters will be graded on a point system based on a combination of: character, effort, IQ, and wisdom.

All registered voters start off with a grade of 140 points, but they can potentially accumulate a grade of 1000 points throughout their lives. A voter with a grade of 1000 is equivalent to five voters with a grade of 200. So imagine a hypothetical election that has two candidates to vote for (A and B), but only 10 voters. If 3 voters (one with grade 400, one with 550, and one with 900) voted for candidate A, and the remaining 7 voters (one with grade 140, three with 200, two with 300, and one with 450) voted for candidate B, candidate A would win with 1850 points vs. candidate B with 1090 points.

a. Character: It’s my estimate that citizens with good character make up about 22% of the population. Being a do-gooder is much more than buying Girl Scout cookies. By good, I am in part referring to people who demonstrate a sufficient amount of honesty and altruism (fairness). Put another way, most people are inherently decent but are socialized to be unconsciously dishonest (tunnel vision) to compete for scarce resources: a fitting or practical job (this applies mainly to men in modern times), housing, desirable mates, healthcare necessities, to live amongst a common culture, etc. As resources become scarce, citizens become more competitive and less honest and altruistic. They don’t call it “a dog-eat-dog world for nothing." In the US, there’s usually no serious consequence for lying or cheating. As the population grows and the resources shrink, the higher the stakes become, causing lying and cheating to intensify. This is one more reason why the we-are-all-equal one-person, one-vote design is past due for a major update. Character mainly applies to citizens who have power (wealth and/or a significant social following). Every registered voter is issued 140 electoral points for character to start off with. The points can be revoked for self-centered dishonesty or reckless actions that expose society to harm.

b. Effort: When citizens make an effort to better themselves and their circumstances and gain life experience from multiple perspectives, electoral points will be issued to their grade. Examples are listed below in the Earning Points section. This is not an exhaustive list.

c. IQ and Wisdom: Whereas IQ is about thinking efficiently, Wisdom is about thinking with perspective. IQ is good at finding shortcuts to accomplishing a goal. Wisdom can pioneer a way through the dark to learn what goal should be accomplished. High-IQ people can quickly acquire already-documented knowledge to perform well at tasks like school or achieve success at any job, giving them a competitive advantage. Wisdom is less competitive in nature and more global in scope. Wise people are more likely to fail and struggle, but they’re also more likely to truly learn, not just find the shortcut answer, like seeking the protection of a social group for its power and safety in numbers. This is why there are a lot of intelligent people in government, but wisdom is hard to find. Wise people build mental models of the principles of reality that are derived from a variety of different perspectives (knowledge about many things), and thus the wise are better able to theorize the future (see in the dark). High-IQ people can still succumb to socialized beliefs, albeit less likely than lower-IQ people. Wise people do not succumb to socialized beliefs because they are independent thinkers and actively seek out people smarter than themselves to learn from, just like President Camacho in the image above. The ability to think in probabilities, tolerate uncertainty, be objective, and feel the human condition is at the root of wisdom. High IQ is not a prerequisite for wisdom, but it helps. For these reasons, wisdom outranks IQ.

Note: The above paragraph is my opinion.

Devising a test for wisdom would be a challenge. Creating an Objectivity Quotient (OQ) test would be a good start. A high score would indicate more openness to hearing opposing views and paying attention to evidence.

Because self-deception, deception, and cheating are selected by evolution, more so in a highly populated, culturally fragmented society, issuing points for wisdom should require the careful judgment of officials in addition to any test result.
-------


Earning Points
This is not a complete list. Some of the categorical listings below may be difficult to implement and police, but keep in mind that this system can be a little loose and imperfect and still be a vast improvement over the one-person, one-vote system.

+70 points: If a citizen has an IQ of 115 or greater, 70 points are added to his or her grade.

Note: Having an IQ greater than 115 becomes less and less important because it’s not how intelligent we are; it’s how we use our intelligence. IQ drops with age, but for those people who are more interested in learning than pretending to be right, their lower IQ is offset by wisdom.

+20 points: voluntary mental disorder clearance; a test to measure levels of narcissism and neuroticism. If levels are low—20 points are issued, good for 30 years—then they are reset back to 0.

+70 points: more than 2 years of college (general education) + an occupation degree or certificate. This shows effort and potential.

Note: Do not be fooled by degrees and certificates. They do not mean a person is truly educated or a true authority. There are vast differences in knowledge and capability between individuals. For example, there are narrowly focused people good at the academics of memorizing information long enough to pass a test (some of these people wear a PhD like an authority badge); then there are degreeless gurus who don’t use the word varsity to describe their education, but because of their genetic makeup and peculiar or extreme life circumstances, make learning something new their daily life-long cup of tea. So degrees and certificates indicate effort and potential only.

+140 points: Interdisciplinary Studies degree. Examples: Russian studies and political science, statistics and software design, manufacturing processes and artificial intelligence, evolutionary psychology, and housing and urban development, law and biotech, food science and medicine, tree science and civil engineering, business and hospitality, etc. Learning different subjects equals greater perspective.

+140 points: graduating from Caltech (California Institute of Technology), MIT (Massachusetts Institution of Technology), or other institutes primarily devoted to the instruction of pure and applied sciences. This group is more likely to be objective.

+20 points: Live abroad for 1 year (exchange student). For example, if you live in a European country for one year, you will gain 20 points. Getting away from the family that’s been socializing you your whole life could result in the future voter gaining another perspective on the world.

Note: Mormon missionaries of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints don’t count as political points because these young adults are chained to the subjective belief system they were indoctrinated into as children. They are little more than automatons directed by their leader to visit another country for 2 years to arrogantly teach instead of learn.

+30 points: There is a gain in perspective from working a job. There’s an even greater gain in perspective from working in more than one type of industry.
5 years or more of continuous work experience (20 hours average per week or more) at the same job as shown on tax records equals +30 points, good for 3 different jobs in 3 different industry classifications: (90 points total).
Example 1: 5 years as an accountant, 5 years as a truck driver = 60 points.
Example 2: 5 years in hospitality, 5 years in manufacturing, and 5 years in the medical field = 90 points.
Example 3: 5 years at a nursery, 5 years as an auto service technician, and 5 years as a legal assistant = 90 points.
Example 4: 5 years as a prosecutor, 5 years as a defense attorney = 60 points.

+30 points: 2 or more years working in the armed forces, police, firefighter, coast guard, United States Army Corps of Engineers, or other institutions that will take a citizen out of their home environment and force them to learn something new, expand their confidence, and see the world from a different perspective.

+30 points: Serving in military combat is a lesson in reality.

+70 points (30 variables): 5 or more years working for the FBI with a kindness stipulation. Each year, the FBI will be judged by the Electoral College. If there are too many reports of mistreating suspects, for example, raiding a home and making a suspect sit outside in the cold in the person's underwear, the FBI as a whole (everyone working for the FBI) could lose 10 to 30 points.

+10 points: for each time serving on jury duty, up to 30 points max.

+10 points: adopt a child. 2 children (20 points max).
+30 points: having a significant disability is a lesson in reality.
+60 points: Reach the age of 40 years old, because 20 years of adult life experience usually improves judgment.

+40 points: After becoming a citizen, an immigrant cannot vote, submit ideas, or make policy changes to the Idea Capture System for 20 years. After 20 years of living in the country as a legal citizen, the immigrants collective value, as in the examples listed above, is totaled, plus an additional 40 points are added for having an immigrant perspective.

+70 points: A citizen that demonstrates objective character, knowledge, and ideas through published works: books, videos (YouTube, TED), etc., up to 280 points max. Judges at the Electoral College will be on the lookout for citizens who meet certain criteria before issuing points.

+210 points: Graduate from the Electoral College.

+70 points: Colleges throughout the US could offer some courses equivalent to those offered by the Electoral College.

A few examples of political demotions
The following revoked points refer to the Character and Wisdom categories of the grading system. Some of these are examples of subjective—not my problem—mentality.

-20 points: Political protesters who break the law impulsively: vandalism, violence, etc.

-70 points: popular social influencers who start false beliefs or spread obvious disinformation that reveals self-deception or hidden personal payoffs. For example, an influencer creates and promotes the false belief that a population collapse is imminent and this will cause a disaster, so please have more babies.

It will take more than 100 years for a country like Japan (which survived two nuclear blasts) to run out of people. Economies are scalable, automation and AI are filling gaps, and human life spans are projected to be much longer in the future. Overpopulation has far more dire consequences than underpopulation. The oceans are filled with microplastics, and the monarch butterfly population has collapsed. Focus on these, please.
 
The motive for the population collapse belief might be: population growth is good for my business (constant supply of cheap labor and new customers); or, more likely, if the human population doesn’t outgrow Earth, how am I going to justify my plan to start a colony on Mars? Also, some influencers might believe they’re scoring brownie points with their god for promoting having more babies.

To grow populations in women-empowered countries, women and housing must be made reasonably affordable to the average man. Men today, as opposed to 60 years ago, must not only compete with women for their livelihood but also out-earn a woman—to even show up on her love interest radar. Women do not give men equal opportunity in the mate-selection arena, and there are no laws to punish women who embezzle money from men through marriage and divorce. The stakes are high, and so is the pressure on men.

Note: [New State] is a social institution that will help rebalance the mate market so women will find men valuable again. This will include affordable housing and healthcare. Affordable housing, healthcare, and women equal an affordable family. The family is the basis of society.


Note: Over the last 50 years, the women’s movement has encouraged young women to be their own heroes. Consequently, many women have removed themselves from the mating market to pursue their careers. Some women desexualize themselves like academic nuns; some masculinize into an unclear gender type like a firefighter, athlete, or military officer (the type of physical training required of them literally messes with their hormones and alters their bodies from female to male). Other women find that their careers and social media accounts give them money and attention (less need for a man now). Highly sought-after healthy women are in such scarce supply that they’re at risk of being recruited into the booming sex industry. This and other factors in the almost unregulated mating market have caused a female drought in the mate-selection economy over the last few decades. When scarcity is common and the stakes are high, the bell curve of evolutionary behaviors is pressured to shift men from gentlemen to monsters. The scary part is that, because of social correctness, the monsters are not at liberty to disagree, so they operate in silence!

-70 points: Monopolizing a scarce natural resource. For example, women may own their sexuality by posting risque photos of themselves on social media or using their sexual power as a career advancement tool. Women’s sexuality is a high-stakes, scarce natural resource that, when wielded recklessly, is disrespectful to men and can be equivalent to psychological assault. There are tons of desperate men out there exploring venues, searching for women, only to come face-to-face with a sausagefest of other men also seeking someone’s emptiness to fill with their rage. Only a small percentage of men are truly getting their gender needs satisfied. The aching rest are at risk of turning feral or engaging in endeavors such as overeating, alcohol, religion, mental illness, and playing too much Grand Theft Auto. They are beginning to realize that in America, it's every man for-himself.

The hazard of the misguided woman mainly applies in a public context (school, workplace, grocery store, gym, internet), circumstances that make it difficult for men to avoid the gravity of lust. Unfortunately, tradition still encourages men to be invincible, absorb the unfairness, and let women have their way. Also, society still encourages desirable young women to believe they are victims of boy advances while overlooking the obvious fact—women in modern times won the gender lottery; they have a strategic advantage: more options than men ever had while simultaneously needing men less than at any time in history. Men and women are no longer in symbiosis. This is the elephant in the room! Re-balancing the mate market will go a long way toward reducing chilling 911 calls, tearful sing-a-longs to Amazing Grace, and moments of silence. Maybe women should be paid less than men until they demonstrate their commitment to true equality, not their definition of equality.

-70 points: Religious or political leaders chanting to their followers: ignore science and don’t vaccinate against any pandemic virus. As you may already know, some of these religious leaders were poetically silenced by COVID and are no longer with us, losing more than just points.

-60 points: Religious missionaries going door to door in the US or visiting other countries with the goal of spreading their religion.

-60 points: Secret lobbying, accepting bribes, donations, or job offers will result in a demotion in voting points for both the congress members and the lobbyists.

-20 points: members of Congress benefiting from insider trading of individual stocks.

-60 points: corrupt real estate practices: providing false information to appraisers, resulting in an inflated property value.

Note: For the purpose of revoking political points, the Electoral College should focus less on the law being broken. Laws are not always fair, and people can break them by accident. Instead, focus on the pattern of a person's behavior (motive and intellectual slippage). Is this the type of person who cheats his or her way through life? Is this person corrupt? Does this person have weak self-control?

-60 points: many tattoos or piercings. This indicates self-centeredness and blind social following.
-60 points: smoking cigarettes. This indicates a blind social following.
-60 points: second DUI (drunk driving). This indicates self-centeredness and weak self-control.
-60 points: drug possession.

Note: Citizens who have made a mistake can earn their way back through certification programs at colleges equivalent to what is offered at the Electoral College.

-60 points: having more than 2 kids without a permit. A permit with justified reasons for having more than two kids must be acquired prior to any citizen making copies of themselves. The value of each citizen's genetic traits should be appraised so as not to create just another low-potential human. This way, society can increase the likelihood that future generations will possess at least adequate market value. No person should be born with health, intelligence, or aesthetic disadvantages. Another elephant is in the room!

Political Candidate Criteria
1. The top positions, such as the president, vice president, all state governors, Congress, and any influential advisors, must have a minimum of 600 points to run for office or serve. The president, vice president, speaker of the house, and state governors must be at least 40 years old and have submitted one or more ideas or policy changes to the idea capture system discussed above in Converting American Democracy to a Promocracy (point 1).

2. Citizens who have spent the better part of their lives as high-ranking military leaders, government spies, or church leaders are disqualified from running for office because they are fear-based specialists with a knowledge perspective that is likely too narrow. But, of course, there are always exceptions.

3. A culture drift statute. Candidates must have been US citizens for 20 years before being elected, appointed, or holding any public position or acting as an assistant to a candidate or public official from the federal and state level down to a small town or community. The intent of this is to prevent foreigners of very different cultures from entering the US, seizing power, opening the borders, converting our country into their country, or influencing the more powerful US to go river rafting, guzzling our tax dollars to solve another country's problems. Problems that would not likely exist in the first place had their country been using some form of a Promocracy.

4. Candidates must pass a physical and mental health evaluation just like commercial pilots, but not as strict.

Where does Objective and Subjective end up?
On an individual level, the pure objective mind-set is risky when living in a world dominated by subjective believers because truth is no match for deception. The objective individual is at risk of extinction. The subjective believers, on the other hand, deceive their way into more powerful—safer life situations—often at the expense of the objective. At the group level of humanity at large, the subjective believers will lead humanity to extinction. A balance must be maintained: everyone must be subjective and focus on their own wants and needs, but if the truth is ignored, problems will eventually manifest until a revolution is called for.


If society were to capitalize on the more objective types of people by promoting them into power, there would be less internal conflict, problems would get solved quicker, and more innovative solutions would be found because objective thinkers have a more comprehensive intellectual perspective and don’t stick to bad ideas for long.

There you have it
This first version of the Promocracy is not perfect or complete, but it doesn’t have to be. Just start with the obvious and take small steps. It should promote the objective over the subjective, the wise over the unwise. And never forget the quote from 2001 by former President George W. Bush: “Cooler heads shall prevail.”

Other Voting Powers

Women Vote Twice
Women know they don’t have to be politicians to have political power. Women, to a large extent, determine the character of man and thus the character of future leaders in politics by subtly training men and using their sexuality like Kryptonite (the only substance that can weaken superman) to organize men into a dominance hierarchy by choosing subjective believers (dominance and weak self-control) over objective thinkers (truth and strong self-control). I think this is the root cause of why democracy is polarized and why society finds truth, justice, and wisdom so hard to achieve. In addition, women often choose a man-elevator to help them gain financial, career, and sometimes political power. Women essentially vote twice: once in the bedroom and once in the voting booth. This contradicts the "we want to be treated as equals" belief.

Lastly, women are natural social followers: they can immediately detect the subtle breeze of changing social sentiment, instinctively notice popular trends, for example, an open concept floor plan, are sensitive to what might be offensive, and they have influential finesse. This is evolution's way of seeking social positions where there is safety in numbers. But it’s much more than that. Sometimes women join in solidarity and act as social-correctness gatekeepers, deciding what should be considered right and wrong based on popularity and sometimes even what will or will not be a topic of conversation. This allows them to altogether dodge critical thinking conversations that might border on jeopardizing their female self-interests. Think about how political power has shifted over the last 50 years as women have entered the work force in almost every career field, including the media. I think women, by their very nature, have unknowingly contributed to the paralysis of social correctness—no fault of their own, of course—and evolution gifted women the purpose of internal leadership within a group to teach children to follow the established cultural rules (socialize children into popular belief).

The Catholic Church's Indirect Vote
If you’ve been watching the news recently, you might have noticed numerous Central and South American immigrants carrying their children across the US border. If you’re an independent thinker, you might ask the obvious question: Why are these women having so many children when their home country has been on the edge of anarchy for most of their lives, with not enough practical living space and available resources? Even our 10,000-year-old ancestors had the common sense to use birth control. Yes, scientists have discovered 10,000-year-old condoms made of deer skin. Who are these Latinos receiving guidance from?

Maybe the Catholic Church should accept some responsibility for this mess. After all, the Pope has openly encouraged Latinas to procreate. This is reckless. Do our US leaders have the courage to risk offending the Pontiff and discuss with him the acceptance of a few million migrants from Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, and Mexico to become citizens of Rome? What about the Vatican Bank? Yes, the Catholic Church has a bank! Who knows how much money the church has accumulated for hundreds of years? Maybe they can help financially. Are US leaders free to discuss these options in our current free and open democracy? Or does social correctness make this unthinkable?

Also, why aren’t the gun-loving Republicans suggesting we arm the immigrants with firearms and send them back home to protect their lives and liberty from the gangs and their government? Is this not consistent with the value guns have, according to gun rights advocates?

When these Latins invade the US, many will drive without a drivers license, car insurance, or pay taxes, and they will send their money back to their home country. They will drive wages down and housing, healthcare, and car insurance up. I know, because they are my coworkers and neighbors. I am not saying they’re all bad, but there's a high number of low achievers (cholos: those with indigenous genes) in this ethnic group that typecast the way the rest of the group is perceived. The crowning achievement of these cholos lives is not likely to be calculating the speed and trajectory to successfully orbit a spacecraft around Mars, but rather successfully performing orbital donuts in the parking lot of Von's late on a Sunday night before the police helicopter fly’s over my apartment to break up the mayhem. Because of social correctness, the police cannot do much, so they’ll be back next Sunday.

Some will receive free healthcare, which I will pay for through taxes. I cannot afford health insurance for myself, so YouTube has become my healthcare provider. They all need homes; this is largely why housing prices are unaffordable in California. I know white families that were broken up because they were priced out of the housing market and forced to move out of state. Plus, one of my aunts ended up homeless; the stress caused her to become mentally ill, and she died. These immigrants will eventually become a massive group of voters. Some who have already been here are suggesting capitalism be replaced with socialism, the southern border be dismantled, and Mexico and the US be merged into a single country.

The Catholics and other religions have built empires out of myths (self-deception is how evolution makes people into social warriors to dominate other groups to control scarce resources like territory and women). These fake leaders have good intentions, but they’re just middlemen cohabitating with their beliefs and expressing their need for dominance. For some, it may be because their mate-selection need is not being fulfilled or satisfied. Unfulfilled needs can manifest into unhealthy behaviors.

History scholars say there is only a one-third likelihood Jesus ever existed, and the gospels are myths. In my opinion, religious beliefs were never intended for you or me; they are expired beliefs created for a society that lived thousands of years ago. Imagine the arrogance it would take for someone in our time to create social rules to govern the lives of people living 2000 years from now in the future!

Why I cannot vote
I lived in a high-crime city for more than 20 years. The city is 90% Latin. I wondered why I kept getting jury duty. I suspect many of the Latins claim they don’t speak English and therefore are excused, resulting in a constant deficit of qualified jurors. I couldn’t afford to be called to serve jury duty so often, so I unregistered to vote because I heard only registered voters are called to serve jury duty. So I am outnumbered 9 to 1, and I cannot vote.

Why can’t I just move? Because there is no affordable housing in California. To purchase a free-standing house built in 1967 in what is today considered a nice neighborhood would have cost you $250,000 just thirty years ago; today that same house is 1.2 million. Why can’t they just build more houses? Because that doesn’t address the root cause of the problem. Building more houses is like building more freeways to alleviate congestion. It just invites more people to move to California, thus filling up the new freeways, and we are back to where we started.

To really solve the housing problem, and for that matter, a great many other problems too: initiate sensible family planning for population management; pass laws to prevent foreigners from buying real estate; set aside or create housing zones that cannot be used as investment or income property; zoning for RV parks that includes tiny mobile homes; and incentivize the development of 24-hour internet café crash pads like they have in Japan to solve their homeless problem. Also, communities would be more inclined to build low-income housing if it were limited to citizens who are clean and responsible. Just creating "let us all be equal" low-income housing is like asking good citizens to accept a zoo of toxic people and potential savages to live in their neighborhood. Citizens would rather take their chances sharing the neighborhood with a mountain lion and clean up coyote poop once in a while.

Solving society's multifaceted problems is achievable if we:
1. Be mindful of the basic instincts: dominance, mate-selection, and territory.
2. Don’t venture too far from the principle of being objective.
3. Start with the obvious and take small steps.

Do this, and more often than not, everything will work out for the better. That’s it for now.

This essay was brought to you by Evolution: the secret that keeps itself. A force you literally cannot leave home without.



















END