Direct democracy in Telearea

Demosthenes D. Kyriazis

Copyright © Demosthenes Kyriazis, tel.: ++30-210-2029666, e-mail: [email protected]

All rights reserved.

Printed and Bounded by Skitso Co., Athens, Greece.

First Edition in Greek: Editions Patakis, Athens, September 2005

The vision of digital Pnyka 1

1 Drawing by G. Palis.

To Elpida and her friends

To the young people and to those who feel and think like young people

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my honest and warm feelings of grati-tude:

• To Professor Nikos Alexandropoulos for his moral support and for giving me the honor by writing the prologue of this book as well as for his encouraging comments,

• To Professor Theodosis Tassios also for his moral support and for giving me great honor by expressing his encoura-ging comments,

• To my colleague and friend, physicist and expert in elec-tronics, Giannis Stamatopoulos for his important moral and useful help to the publication of this book,

• To my wife, physicist and expert in electronics, Gioula Ky-riazi-Tzortzi who helped me and supported me to my effort to write this book,

• To Mrs. Eirini Tzortzopoulou who showed great interest in studying the dissertations of this book and made the ap-propriate corrections and observations.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgements .............................................................. 9

Prologue of English Version ................................................. 17

PROLOGUE ........................................................................ 19

INTRODUCTION ................................................................ 21

PART I A different view on political power and on political systems ............................................................................ 25

Subject: The power of individual and the power of the state .. 27

The natural and moral law of transformation ..................... 28

The power of the state .................................................... 28

Subject: The philosophy of Political Power Systems .............. 35

The inflows .................................................................... 35

The outflows .................................................................. 35

The black box of political power ....................................... 37

The classification ............................................................ 38

John Locke’s experiment ................................................. 41

Subject: The architecture of political power systems ............ 42

The building units ........................................................... 42

The architecture ............................................................. 44

Subject: The basic forms of political power systems ............. 48

Monarchies and Oligarchies ............................................. 49

Direct Democracies ......................................................... 52

Indirect Democracies ...................................................... 53

Subject: The case of Athenian Democracy ............................ 61

The view of antipopular and elitist political system ............ 62

12

The concentration of political power ................................. 64

The contribution of slaves ............................................... 66

The view of an utopist and ineffective political regime ...... 67

The causes of ancient Greek civilization ............................ 68

Subject: The deterministic instability of indirect democracies 74

The Law of Entropy in Social Systems ............................... 81

Subject: The three appeals of political power ....................... 85

The appeal of God .......................................................... 86

The appeal of country and society .................................... 86

The appeal of people’s power .......................................... 87

Subject: The overall quality of political systems ................... 92

Flexibility and concentration ............................................ 94

Transparency and concentration ...................................... 94

Stability and concentration .............................................. 94

Acceptance and concentration ......................................... 94

Arbitrariness and concentration ........................................ 95

Corruption and concentration ........................................... 95

Arrogance and concentration ........................................... 95

Subject: The wisdom of Messiah and the stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set .................................................................... 98

Stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set .............................. 102

The wisdom of messiah ................................................. 102

Comparative evaluation ................................................. 103

The theory of the Organized Set .................................... 104

Conclusion ................................................................... 107

13

The big secret .............................................................. 109

Subject: The crucial choice ............................................... 111

Women’s strategy ......................................................... 113

Minorities and citizens’ power ........................................ 120

Democracy and decentralization ..................................... 121

Democracy and trade unionism ...................................... 123

Democracy and opinion polls ......................................... 123

PART II The intentional distortion of Democracy’s sense .... 125

Subject: Established conception phenomena ...................... 127

The established conception of the flat earth .................... 128

The established conception of the geocentric system ....... 133

The established conception of the stable time ................. 136

The established conception of today’s democracies .......... 140

A sketch of the relativity theory ..................................... 145

Subject: Intelligence of the citizens and political systems.... 151

Types of intelligence: IQ and EQ .................................... 152

Intelligence and civilization models ................................. 153

The equations of IQ and EQ .......................................... 155

Social schizophrenia ...................................................... 156

Subject: Democracy and modern physics ........................... 159

Ecclesia of Demos and logic of the total .......................... 159

Justice Administration and logic of total .......................... 160

Leaders and logic of the random .................................... 161

Subject: Prigogine's theories and the Athenian Democracy's institutions ...................................................................... 167

14

Brief description of Prigogine work ................................. 167

Prigogine’s theories related to the Principles of Democracy .. 171

Instead of epilogue .......................................................... 181

PART III Digital technology as an opportunity and as a vehicle for democracy’s expansion and regeneration ..................... 183

Subject: Technology of the Mass Media and political systems ...................................................................................... 185

Radio times .................................................................. 185

Television times ............................................................ 187

The oligarchic features of Mass Media ............................ 188

Subject: Digital technology of interactive networks ............ 193

The birth and the development ...................................... 193

The Internet ................................................................. 197

The perspectives .......................................................... 200

Subject: Democracy and digital technology ........................ 205

The changes ................................................................ 206

Digital Pnyka ................................................................ 207

Digital time .................................................................. 209

Digital Isegoria ............................................................. 209

Digital informing ........................................................... 210

Digital tele-voting ......................................................... 211

Digital mentality ........................................................... 213

Subject: The digitalization of Pnyka ................................... 216

Simply democracy ......................................................... 220

Globalization and Digital Pnyka ...................................... 221

A different revolution .................................................... 222

15

EPILOGUE ....................................................................... 229

BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................ 235

Prologue of English Version

“Direct Democracy in Telearea” was published in Greek in 2005.

The main target of this book is the presentation of the idea that the digital technology is an opportunity and a vehicle for the re-orientation of today’s democracies to the principles and to the spirit of the ancient Greek democracy.

Some colleagues and friends who are interested in this issue but they do not speak Greek, encouraged me to translate “my Telearea” in English.

Thus, it was created the English version of Telearea which has: three new subjects (Intelligence of the citizens and political sys-tems – Democracy and Modern Physics – Prigogine’s theories and Athenian Democracy’s institutions), some other little addi-tions and some further footnotes, related to the Greek edition.

The translation of all the above Greek texts was carried out by the young lady Katerina Kamakari.

Ms Kamakari worked with interest and enthusiasm in order to translate in English a difficult text. A text that includes many meanings and terms taken from political sciences, applied sciences and technology.

I would like to express to my friend Katerina my deep apprecia-tion and my warm thanks for her effort.

Many people consider that any effort has its own value inde-pendently of its results.

I wish that this would also stand for the writing and the transla-tion of this book.

Athens, September 2008

Demosthenes Kyriazis

19

PROLOGUE

This book, which could have also been suitably titled “Elpida in the land of Telearea”2, constitutes an extension to the previous book titled “The Regeneration of Democracy, the Vision of Di-rect Democracy in the era of digital technology”.

Both books aim to present and to argue the idea that the new digital technology of computer science and telecommunications can be used as a vehicle that will transform the passive “coach potato citizens” into active citizens.

In our days, where new technology has actually become the eye and the ear of “Big Brother” causing the justified feelings of terror when facing the possibility of the complete disappear-ance of personal freedom, this book, which introduces the vi-sion of a digital Pnyka, sends a message of hope.

The new digital technology has followed the same historical course as all the other new technologies in the past; an histori-cal course, which is exactly the same as that of the technology of simple machines, of levers.

It is absolutely certain that the first time man used lever, he did not do it in order to carry a block of stone but, instead, because he wanted to break someone’s head and grab his quarry or his wife.

Thousands of years passed since that moment until to under-stand and to use the levers for our own good. It was until Arc-himedes said the historical phrase: “Δος μοι πα στω και τα γαν κινάσω” (Give me where to stand and I will move the earth).

The writer presents his ideas using the ancient Greek inductive methodology through the discussions of a team of young stu-dents in the imaginary land of Telearea. The symbolism of the 2 In Greek, Elpida means Hope. Telearea (Τήλε-Area) is the hybrid name given to the imaginary country where the ancient Greek spirit and the digital techno-logy coexist (Author’s note).

20

name that he is using is obvious and in my opinion a successful one.

The students that form this team were gathered together by Elpida. She is the highly intelligent and beautiful girl with the “blue-green eyes and red hair” that we met in his first book.

The important feature of these discussions is that they allow the reader to formulate his thoughts and to give them a con-crete sense regarding his possibly confused and very general views on the contemporary democratic political systems. The reader suddenly sees the obvious and wonders: Why I was not able to see it all this time?

In this book, the writer for once more is trying to find out an analogy between political ideas and physical magnitudes in or-der to make them countable. This is necessary in order to ob-jectify these ideas and to avoid the potential result of a situa-tion where two contrary opinions can be equally right or equally wrong.

This effort, although indispensable, is still in pre-embryonic stage. It is still at the process of conception. We have not even reached yet the equivalent experiment of John Locke which is described in the book.

Nevertheless, the writer is seeking the means that can be used so as to be able to face the notions and the magnitudes de-scribed in the sciences of sociology and politics with the logic of the applied sciences. The energy conception of political power is an indicative proposal which may in the future be proved to be something more important than coherence equivalence.

Athens, July 2005

Nikos Alexandropoulos

Professor Emeritus in the University of Ioannina

Corresponding member of the Academy of Athens

INTRODUCTION

Almost three years ago I published my book that contained some thoughts and some views on Democracy, on the digital technology and their interactive relation.3

This book was my small contribution, my mite, to the idea that contemporary digital technology can be used, if people want to, as an opportunity and vehicle for democracy’s expansion and regeneration.

Until the publication of this book, I thought that all people –experts, politicians and simple citizens – would be interested in any idea which aims at the reinforcement of the citizens’ partic-ipation in the exercise of state power.

The circulation of the book became the cause to understand that “The Vision of Direct Democracy in the Era of Digital Tech-nology” does not represent a vision shared by the majority of people. The majority of people were indifferent, even negative, to the possibility of participating in the exercise of political pow-er and of assuming the consequent responsibilities.

The pompous declaration of experts, politicians and citizens: “the people rule” seemed like something that needed to be said but it could not actually be achieved. The people should be the ruler but without ruling. The people should have power but without exercising it.

The main reasons given as the cause of this contradictory and absurd situation were the following:

a. The intense doubting of the necessity and usefulness of citizens’ participation in the exercise of political power. That is, citizens believed that such participation would make po-litical power to be exercised in a way worse than the exist-

3 The book with the title “The Regeneration of Democracy” and the subtitle “The Vision of Direct Democracy in the Era of Digital Technology” was published in 2002 by Patakis publications.

22

ing one into which only the representatives of the people participate. Deep down they believed that only a good man, a “messiah” could ensure the right way of exercising politi-cal power.

b. The intense doubting concerning the handling of the reac-tions that would arise from the ranks of the established or-der whose interests would be damaged by such participa-tion. Those reactions are considered to have such a power and to be so effective that any effort of essential partici-pation from the part of citizens in the exercise of political power could be described as a “lost case”, as a joke.

c. The intense doubting as far as it concerns the possibility that the new digital technology can ensure the necessary circumstances for such an essential participation.

That means to ensure: “interactive digital information”, the “digital isegoria”4 as well as flexibility, rationalism and low cost of decisions; decisions that would obviously be taken after “digital referendums.”

When I realized the difficulty in the objective approaching of the aforementioned matters, being myself also someone living in this world where the notions of the established order domi-nate, I asked Elpida’s help, the young student of Telearea who, together with her friends, they studied the odd behavior of Te-leareans regarding the exercise of political power5 .

4 Isegoria (Ισηγορία): The right of all citizens of Ecclesia in ancient Athens to use the same amount of time for their speeches. 5 As it was mentioned in the third part of the book “The Regeneration of De-mocracy”, titled “The Democracy of Telearea”, Elpida is a beautiful girl with “blue-green eyes and red hair” gifted by nature with high intelligence (IQ).

Even since the first years of her studies, Elpida was observing with great atten-tion the behaviors of the politicians and of the citizens of Telearea.

“She could see that the people of political power were behaving in an arrogant, hypocritical way while feeling at ease as if they believed that the citizens were people of lower intelligence.

23

Elpida’s friends willingly and showing also great interest gave us floppy discs and CDs with their recorded proposals and discus-sions concerning the above matters.

A selection of these discussions is included in the following pages.

According to the wishes of the owners of the provided material, there is no mention of the names of Elpida’s colleagues that assume the role of the introducer neither of those of the par-ticipants in the discussions. As they told us, in that way the fo-cus would be exclusively on the presentation and on the projec-tion of the ideas and not on the people who bear the ideas.

Possibly this also aimed at the protection of Elpida’s colleagues from the reactions of those whose interests could be hurt by these ideas.

She could see all those considered to be the role models of knowledge and morality –her parents, her teachers, the grown ups - behaving as if they were hypnotized. As if they were addicted to those behaviors and being not able to discern, the right from the wrong, the truth from the lie.

Elpida was puzzled and she was wondering: - How is it possible that these things happen? - Is it me the one who is mistaken?”

Elpida confided to her friends and colleagues her queries and her worries. Slowly, all together they started discussing, studying and analyzing the prob-lems of democracy in Telearea, in order to find some ways of solutions. Their effort became more systematic when they founded an association which they named “The Society of Friends for the Democracy Regeneration”.

PART I

A different view on political power and on political systems

In the energy conception of political power the degree of the power concentration constitutes the basic characteristic of the political systems. The point of concentration comes second in importance. Systems that have the same degree of concentration while situated in different points are equivalent ones.

Nevertheless, people do not pay attention to this physical principle. They try to improve political systems by changing the point and not the degree of power concentration, igno-ring that when such principles are violated there is always a major cost to be paid.

Discussion of 10th January

Subject: The power of individual and the power of the state

Colleague- Introducer

With the term power of individual we mean the ability of every human being to take decisions and to put them in prac-tice while assuming the consequent responsibility and taking the appropriate care.

The dual ability of taking and of implementing decisions consti-tutes the power of individual. The ability of taking decisions without being able to implement them is meaningless. It is not power.

In the rationale of the aforementioned definition the sense of the individual’s power and the sense of the individual’s freedom are concurrent. A human being has his individual freedom when he has his individual power and vice versa. Consequently, it is absurd to believe that we can assign all our political power –even when we want to – to somebody else and still be free.

God and nature have planted inside us this power. And certainly God did so wisely. Consequently, any “documented opinion” concerning the need to improve or to transform this power con-stitutes a drivel if not a cunning trickery of the political, reli-gious and intellectual established order which aims at the ful-fillment of shellfish goals.

The aforementioned views seem to be justified to a great ex-tent. They could be absolutely justified if a human being was an “individual being”. In the contrary they could not be justified in any way, in the case that a human being was a 100% “social being”. That is, in case a human being was not an autonomous being but only a member of a “greater organism” which is called society.

So, human beings are individual beings or social beings?

28

The natural and moral law of transformation

Once upon a time, a human being was an individual being. With the passing of centuries, the human being is evolving and is being transformed into a social being whose member status becomes equal and even more important than that of being an autonomous person.

This transformation constitutes a spontaneous natural evolve-ment and, at the same time, an aspiration of every human be-ing. That is, it represents the outcome of a natural and moral law which it was produced the man’s domination on earth.

As a result, the transformations of the individual power within the frame of this law should be regarded neither as drivels nor as an act of transcendence or violation of the wisdom of Na-ture. They represent transformations and improvements of na-ture and man.

Erwin Schrödinger, the famous awarded with Nobel price phy-sicist, states the following on the subject of the transformation:

“The achievement of going deeper into the innermost of our organisms’ development, allows us to understand very well, I believe, that in any case all our life should be a constant battle with our primitive self.

…any personal life, any day in the life of a person should represent a part, no matter how small, of this evolution. It is a sculpturing, no matter how important, on the eternal statue of our kind”6

The power of the state

The transformation of human beings into social beings resulted in the development of a system of protection for the new or-ganism which was called society. That is, something similar to

6 “Near to Man. My Cosmic Theory.” By Erwin Schrödinger.

29

the immunization system which was developed in the human body.

This immunization system of society is – it should be – the state power or, as it is more often called, the political authority.

The first political power systems that worth to be mentioned were developed in the city-states of Ancient Greece. From the word city (πόλη, pole), the place where these systems were firstly developed, we formed the terms politics (πολιτική), and politician (πολιτικός).

Consequently, these terms do not only refer to the communal co-existence but they also point out the propulsion of the trans-formation.

At the beginning, the architect of the political power systems was nature. The systems of nature – the natural political power systems – aimed at the survival of the members of the commu-nity. We still observe “natural political power systems” in the flocks of wild animals, in the flights of birds and in the swarms of bees.

After passing of many centuries, the responsibility for the de-velopment of political power systems was devolved from nature on man.

The political systems developed by man did not restrict them-selves just to the securing of their members’ survival; they moved on even further. They promoted the development of this new organism which is called society.

This new kind of the social human being is the one that domi-nated on earth. The first kind of the individual human being, did not dominate.

During the centuries, that the control in the development and function of the political power systems belonged to nature, there were not any serious problems to be faced.

The problems appeared since this control was devolved from nature on human beings.

30

The presumptuous and narrow minded “wisdom” of people changed the goals and the priorities of the political power sys-tems.

The new goals set by the systems were mainly incompatible with the law of transformation. Now, the goal was the protec-tion of the individual political power from the unrestrained ex-ercise of power by the other members of the society. This kind of protection was necessarily identified with the limitation of the individual power. But in most cases things got even worse. The goal of the political power systems became the protection of the system itself and not of the society’s members.

In the midst of the confusion created by these changes, the completion of the transformation of man into a social being, which had already been started by nature and people alike, re-mained forgotten and neglected.

The political power systems did not enable the transformation of people into social beings but led instead to their transforma-tion into individual beings with hierarchical political power. Something that can not be found in the “organisms and socie-ties of nature”, where there is hierarchical order in the “operation” and not in the “political power”.

One of the few exceptions of this rule is the political system of democracy in the cities of Ancient Greece and especially the excellent example of the political system of Athenian Democ-racy.

In conclusion, I would like to mention a basic deduction which would hopefully be yours too: Indeed, the individual’s power truly constitutes a basic choice of Nature. But also, the power of peoples’ set, the political authority constitutes a choice of Nature and of people; the law of transformation expresses this choice.

As a result, the view that in our days is very often supported and suggested that “we should abolish political power because is contrary to the laws of nature”, is false.

31

The problem of political systems authority cannot be solved through its abolishment; it would be solved through its recon-struction, a reconstruction that would turn it into a vehicle for the completion of the aforementioned transformation.

When this transformation reaches its completion, then the con-trasts between individual power and state power would be minimized because the individual power would coincide with the state power.

The fulfilment of such a coincidence presupposes that the rulers of the state would be the citizens themselves; in deeds and not in words.

A Colleague

What is the individual power and that of the state which, ac-cording to your introduction, is governed by the laws of phys-ics?


I cannot give to your extremely important and difficult question a generally accepted answer. But if you wish to hear an opin-ion, I could say that individual power and state power is a form of energy similar to the spiritual, psychic and mechanical en-ergy of human beings. According to this rationale, the political power is simply the total sum of the energies of its citizens. If a state has N citizens and each citizen has, in average rate Po

7

Power, then, the Power of the state Ps would simply be the total sum of the citizens’ power; that is,

Ps=N . Po

A Colleague

This definition of the state power leads to a certain conclusion or is it just a different approach?

7 Power is the energy in the unit of time.

32

Colleague - Introducer

I think that the aforementioned logical and simple definition makes clear that the power of a state is the total power of its citizens and not the creation of a leader gifted with great spiri-tual, moral and other kind of potencies.

This easy to understand conclusion actually coincides with the next conclusion reached by philosophers and politicians that used different means of verification: “The potency of a state is the total sum of its citizens’ consciousness and not the ingenious creation of their leaders”.

A Colleague

Your view that the political power is energy seems reasonable and it surely interprets already known conclusions that we reached to through following different paths. But, is it possible that this view is totally arbitrary and untenable?

Colleague – Introducer

Not exactly. As you are surely aware, energy is defined as the ability to produce work. Nevertheless, this ability is a cerebral deduction and not a product of our senses. By using our senses we perceive a certain form of energy which in the science of physics we call work.

Work and energy, at the bottom line, they constitute the same entity. They resemble to a man who is constantly moving from light to darkness and from darkness to light. When this entity is in the light we see it and we call it work. When it is in the darkness we sense it and we call it energy. That is the reason why work and energy in the applied sciences can be counted by using the same measuring units (Joules, KWh).

The work of political power exists. This existence proves the energy hypostasis of political power.

33

A Colleague

If political, spiritual, psychic and mechanical potency of man is energy, then how can the law of energy conservation be valid as far as the mortal human being is concerned?


Once more time, I can only give you an opinion and not a gen-erally accepted answer.

The man does not produce energy but he transforms the existing energy into work. Man is leading the already exist-ing energy from darkness to light and he turns it to work.

Based on this rationale, the law of energy conservation accord-ing to which “the energy cannot be lost and cannot be created from zero, it can only be transformed”, is com-patible with the reality of the mortal man’s existence. Likewise, law of energy conservation is compatible with the dogmas con-cerning the soul’s immortality, the soul’s reincarnation, as well as with the axiom that human rights cannot be transferred.

Maybe, one day it could be proved that the law of en-ergy conservation was not discovered by the Physicists but by the Philosophers and that it referred to the psy-chic energy of human beings.

A Colleague

If the potency of a state is the total sum of the power of its citizens, then where the meaning of the necessity for leaders and what lies is their contribution? The view shared by people for thousands of years about the importance of the leaders’ contribution is a fallacy?


The leaders’ contribution exists and it is important. It resem-bles with the contribution of a catalyst to the realization of a chemical reaction. In some cases the presence of the catalyst has such a determinative character that the reaction cannot be

34

realized without its use. Apart from that, it is obvious that the contribution of a catalyst cannot be compared with that of the reacting elements. If the reacting elements do not exist the reaction cannot take place. If they do exist and the catalyst is absent, then the reaction can be realized by either changing the catalyst or by changing its given conditions.

The contribution and the importance of the leaders is similar to those of a catalyst.

35

Discussion of 27th January

Subject: The philosophy of Political Power Systems


The philosophy of every system begins with the answer to this basic problem: What does the system do? That is, what is its purpose, which are its inflows (consumptions), and which are its outflows (provisions).

Very often, in the applied sciences and in technology, the de-velopment of the philosophy of a system is being realized by using the method of the Black Box. According to this method, the system is considered as a black box that has an entrance gate and an exit gate. Because the box is black, we cannot see what takes place inside it. So, we have to restrain ourselves to the study of the system’s inflows and outflows, missing at the moment the study of the problem arising when asking HOW all these, which constitute the architecture of the system happen.

It is obvious that the black box represents a simple deductive way that enables the easy development of the systems’ phi-losophy.

The inflows

Based on the existing experience we can easily reach the con-clusion that the individual power, the freedom of the individual, are the inflows of the systems in question.

The outflows of the system will be created by consumption, by burning freedom. The individual freedom is the only kind of “fuel” in the political power systems.

The outflows

Although the subject of the inflows is simple and has one-way solution, the subject of the outflows is complex and can be solved with many alternative ways.

36

In order to be justified the existence of a system of political power, its outflows should be more valuable than its inflows.

Still, what is the outflow that can be more valuable than the utmost good of human beings’ freedom? Do such outflows ex-ist? Is it possible, that the quest for them can be a utopian ef-fort like the squaring of the circle?

The answer to the above basic questions is that the effective freedom of the individual and the basic goods, represent out-flows of equal value or of bigger practical importance.

Effective freedom of the individual constitutes a subtotal of the whole, of the absolute freedom, which is exercised unim-peded and with no restraints, thanks to the care and to the re-sponsibility shown by the state, by the political power.

It is obvious that in a society there must be found a way to en-sure that the freedom of one will not become an impediment for the freedom of others. This basic precondition, that is the existence of social life, is ensured by applying the appropriate restraints, without any discrimination, to the freedom of the individual. The remaining freedom, which can be exercised with no restraints and obstacles to be faced, represents the effective freedom of the human being. I think that effective freedom is called “rights” by the scientists of politics.

In essence, rights do not signify types of allowances given by the political power systems but actually, they represent “re-straints” of them which are expressed not by the individual power that gets lost, but by the one which is saved.

Basic goods are the goods, that are indispensable for the sur-vival of people and for that reason they are considered to be of equal value with the freedom of people; freedom has meaning only for those who are alive.

Basic goods are the men’s life and integrity safety. Basic goods are also, the security that concerns the control and the conser-vation of people’s possessions, namely material goods that are

37

indispensable for their existence such as food, house, clothing, producing implements of goods.

Apparently, the necessity to be ensured the effective freedom and the basic goods, explains the sacrifice of a part of the ut-most good of freedom.

All the above, are summarized in the diagram of the following schema 1.

Inflows Outflows

Absolute freedom Effective freedom+

Basic Goods

Inflows = Outflows

System of political power Inflows Outflows

Absolute freedom Effective freedom+

Basic Goods

Inflows = Outflows

System of political power

Schema 1.

The black box of political power

By observing the above schema we reach the conclusion that the following equation for the political power systems, is valid:

Absolute freedom=Effective freedom + Basic Goods

The above logical relation shows that the total sum of the effec-tive freedom and of the basic goods remains constant. Conse-quently, the increase of the effective freedom implies with de-terministic certainty the reduction of the basic goods and vice versa.

The above equation8 cannot be used for the mathematical analysis of the system because such an attempt demands the conversion of the inflows and of the outflows into a common

8 In this formula we equalize forms of energy. Basic goods signify energy. Ac-tually, some of them can already be counted with energy measuring units (calo-ries).

38

magnitude with existing methods and units of measurement. However, such possibility does not exist; at least until this mo-ment.

Accepting that the promotion of people’s transformation into social beings, is an act of equal value as the ability to ensure the effective freedom and the basic goods, then the political power systems should add to their outflows one more good; a good that could enable the completion of this transformation. We call this good “social power”, but we need to define it in more clear detail.

Within the frame of these thoughts, the previous logical equa-tion of inflows and outflows can be modified to the following form:

Absolute freedom= Effective freedom+ Social power +Basic Goods

The above logical equation shows that the total sum of effective freedom, social power and basic goods remains always con-stant. Consequently, the increase of one of the three outflows determinedly implies the reduction of the other two.

In the contemporary political regimes, social power outflow does not exist for all the people and it is not even included in their aspiring goals. However, this outflow was taken into con-sideration in a political regime that existed 2.300 years ago; in the political regime of Athenian Democracy.

The classification

According to the hierarchical order of the outflows, the political power systems can be classified into three categories:

a. The systems that maximize the effective freedom.

b. The systems that maximize the basic goods and

c. The systems that maximize the social power

39

The first systems are called liberal and they are based on the dogma: First of all freedom. The rest will come.

The second systems are called socialistic and they are based on the dogma: First the basic goods. Without them freedom and social power have only theoretical value.

The third are based on the dogma: First the social power; first comes the participation of the citizens to the exercise of political power. Only this can ensure the catholic provision of effective freedom and of basic goods; only participation can complete the transformation of people into social beings; into citizens.

Outflows hierarchical order, is indeed important. Even more important than the hierarchical order, is the ability to ensure the catholic provision of the outflows; the ability to ensure that all citizens will equally be the recipients of the outflows and that the people of political power will not be the only recipients.

The collapse of political power systems was rarely due to qual-ity and to quantity of the outflows. Usually it was caused by the unjust distribution of the outflows; by the non existent catholic provision of them.

A Colleague

Why the studying method you presented, has not been used by the scientists with expertise in this field? Is it maybe, because it has no practical value?


The studying method in mind is, at least until today, of little practical value. This is not due to a weakness of the methodol-ogy, but it is caused by the lack of measuring, inflows and out-flows, methods and units. Due to this lack, we cannot use mathematics to study the systems and we are limited to the use of general logical approaches that can certainly be done through other ways too.

40

As it is known, for most of the magnitudes related to the exer-cise of political power, it is not existed an internationally ac-cepted agreement concerning the methods and units of meas-urement to be used.

Instead of measurements, we come across subjective estima-tions by experts and not experts, which express individual opin-ions rather than substantial findings for the object we study.

This is also the reason why we see extremely contradictious estimations for the same fact; to call “black” that which some-body else call “white”. But, this expresses an absurdity because there is no way that both estimations can be valid.

However, people still try to approach the truth by using such a methodology; recycling thus the absurdity.

A Colleague

If that is the way things are, what is the point of our discus-sion?


There is a point.

The lack of methods and units of measurement does not de-terminedly shows a weakness in establishing them. Similar diffi-culties have arisen in physics but at least most of them have been surpassed. The establishing of methods and units of measurement in temperature is a typical example.

For thousands of years, people used to “measure” temperature with subjective ways similar to those we use today to measure the different magnitudes concerning the exercise of political power.

The most common way of temperature measurement was based on the feeling of cold or hot when touching a body with our hands.

41

John Locke’s experiment

In 1690, the English philosopher, physicist and physician John Locke (1632-1704) proved with the following experiment that the estimations for temperature were obviously unreliable.

He took three vessels. He filled the first one with hot water. In the second he put cold and in the third lukewarm (half cold and half hot).

Then, he put his right hand in the hot water and his left hand in the cold. After a while, he took both hands out of the hot and the cold water and sunk them both into the lukewarm.

With great surprise he realized that his right hand “said” that the temperature of the lukewarm water was different (lower) than that “said” by his left hand. It was obvious that the sub-jective method of measuring the temperature was unreliable since, for the same water, each hand was giving different esti-mation.

Since then, more than 300 years have passed. The measure-ment of temperature is no longer a subjective estimation. It is an estimation “objective by agreement”, logical and reliable.

We had to face many difficulties until to reach this point; hesi-tations, excitements and disappointments. Still today, tempera-ture estimations are reliable without contradictions or problems.

When I am watching the discussions between politicians and experts in the “TV windows”, many times I get the feeling that I watch something similar to John Locke’s experiments. Is it maybe about time that simple people would draw the conclu-sions that politicians and experts refuse to?

42

Discussion of 7th February

Subject: The architecture of political power systems


All political power systems, all political regimes are structured with the use of the same building units and according to the same architectural plan regardless of their goals and their pri-orities.

The building units

The building units, the subsystems that constitute a political power system are only four: The power carriers, the functional carriers, the laws and the receivers of political power, the citi-zens.

The power carriers take the decisions for the basic and major issues that concern the state and the citizens and they have the right and the potentional political power to implement them. If they are not able to implement them, they are not power carri-ers. It is meaningless to take decisions without having the abil-ity to implement them.

The most important issues for which the aforementioned carri-ers take decisions are: the laws, their observance and the poli-cies to be carried. The term policies, defines the goals and the necessary means of actions in order to be achieved, used by the power carriers, the functional carriers and the citizens.

The functional carriers, look to the implementation of the laws and of the policies that have been decided by the power carriers. As a consequence, the functional carriers do not exer-cise and they should not exercise political power. Instead, they have to minister and to serve the work of political power.

If citizens exercise political power, then the functional carriers serve them also. If citizens do not exercise political power, then the functional carriers do not serve them but they are being

43

transformed and what is more, in an anisotropic way. Towards bottom, they are transformed into masters of citizens. Towards the top, they are transformed into maidservants of power carri-ers.

The realization of this transformation is depended on the politi-cal power of citizens. If citizens do not have political power the above mentioned transformation will determinedly take place even if the “programs that require the respect for citizens” will be implemented or if other measures are being taken.

In our contemporary indirect Democracies the power carriers are being formed by the elected representatives of citizens and the functional carriers by the officials of the Public Sector.

The Laws, on one hand define the outflows of the political power systems and on the other hand they ensure the outflows’ catholic provision. That is, their indiscriminate provision to all citizens.

Logically, morally and institutionally the laws are above all sub-systems. They are situated above the power carriers, the func-tional carriers and citizens as well.

However, this fundamental requirement is incompatible with the fact that laws are created by the power carriers. That means that this requirement equals to a transcendence of the natural principle according to which “creators come above their creations”.

A crucial factor as far as this transcendence is concerned, is the degree of political power’s concentration borne by the carriers that create the laws. The greater this degree is, the ability of the creator is increased and thus the transcendence is hindered and vice versa. The smaller the concentration, the ability of the creator is scattered thus enabling the transcendence.

For example, in the regime of absolute monarchy this transcen-dence cannot take place. The monarch is always above the laws even when there are laws that state the opposite.

44

The best circumstances for the realization of this transcendence can be ensured only in the case that the power carriers are formed by all the citizens.

It should be noted that in the cases where we observe a very high degree of political power concentration, the principle of the sovereignty of the laws cannot be changed. What will simp-ly be changed are the laws that bother the high power concen-tration men.

The contribution made by the small degree of political power concentration in securing the sovereign position of the laws, is acknowledged by constitutional scientists and that is the reason why they presuppose increased majorities when constitutional provisions are about to be approved.

Nevertheless, some times the flexibility in changing the laws greatly enables the dealing with unforeseen implications or weaknesses that arose after the implementation of the laws.

On the other hand, a high degree of flexibility in changing the laws can possibly become a means of downgrading their sove-reign position.

The securing of the stability of the laws’ sovereign position and the flexibility in changing them are two problems with opposing interrelation. Usually, they can be faced by giving priority ei-ther to the stability or to the flexibility according to the prob-lems that should be dealt with in given space and time.

The architecture

The building units mentioned earlier are structured in a unified system, following the way shown in schema 2.

45

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Memo

Actual connection

Theoretical connection

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Memo

Actual connection


Schema 2

Typical diagram of the architecture of political systems (general theoretical form)

The basic characteristics of this architecture as shown in sche-ma 2 are the following:

• Laws are situated above all subsystems and they are direct-ly connected to them (theoretical connection). This connec-tion symbolizes and secures the equal status of the subsys-tems against the laws.

• Between the power carriers, the functional carriers and the citizens, there is a connection in series (Actual connection) that ensures a functional hierarchy and effectiveness.

• Only the power carriers and not the functional carriers nor the citizens have access to the creation of laws.

• Citizens do not participate to the taking of decisions that concern the laws and the policies and as a result they can-not be considered as power carriers. They are not attri-

46

buted the status of the ruler. Citizens have only the status of those being ruled over.

A Colleague

If the political power systems have the same subsystems and the same architecture why we have political regimes that are so different to each other?


Obviously, each subsystem has its own characteristics; its spe-cial characteristics. By studying the special characteristics of each subsystem, we observe that only those attributed to the power carriers are fundamental and critical because they de-ductively define the special characteristics of the other three subsystems; of laws, of functional carriers and of citizens. Thus, any differentiation in the special characteristics of the power carrier subsystem creates a different system of political power.

A Colleague

Which of these special characteristics of the power carriers is the most basic and why?


Your question is an important one that cannot be easily an-swered. Still if you want a summarizing answer, I would say to you that the most basic characteristic of the power carriers is the transparency of their actions.

This view, it is based on the fact that transparency expresses, in an indirect way, the systems’ entropy which constitutes their most basic characteristic.

A Colleague

Which is the relation, between entropy and transparency?

47


The notion of entropy was initially developed in the thermody-namic systems and it expresses the measure of the sys-tem’s disorder (ataxia).9 Great ataxia means high entropy and vice versa.

However, great ataxia means also less information about the system. Thus, through a more general and philosophical point of view, entropy expresses the reciprocal of the measure of information. A lot of information means low entropy and vice versa.

Nevertheless, it is obvious that transparency represents a factor that leads to a greater provision of information and conse-quently to low entropy.

A Colleague

Is the existence of transparency a sufficient factor in order to improve the performance of a system of political power?


Transparency is the most basic characteristic of the political power systems but it is not the only one. Thus, the improve-ment of these systems is a more complex problem which can be possibly discussed in an other meeting.

9 In thermodynamics, entropy S is defined by the equation S=KlnW where K is the constant of Boltzman and W the parameter of ataxia.

48

Discussion of 28th February

Subject: The basic forms of political power systems


According to the energy conception of political power, the most important characteristic of the political regimes is the concen-tration of power.

By mention to a former discussion of ours, the potency of a state PS is the product of a mass N of citizens times the potency Po in the average rate that every citizen has. Thus:

PS=N . PO (1)

If the state has Nε institutional power carriers, then in every power carrier there is a power concentration equal to

oos P

NNPP

⎟⎟⎠

⎞⎜⎜⎝

⎛ΝΝ

==Ν εεε

The ratio NΝε

, that is the citizens per every power carrier,

otherwise the citizens whose political power is managed by each power carrier, expresses the power concentration C.

εΝ=NC (2)

For example, in a country with 10 millions of citizens (N= 10.000.000) that possesses only one power carrier (Nε=1), the power concentration is 10.000.000,

⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ == 000.000.10

1000.000.10C .

49

In the same country, if all citizens are power carriers

(Nε=10.000.000), the concentration is 1, ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ == 1

000.000.10000.000.10C .

Finally, if in the same country there exist 400 institutional power carriers the concentration is 25.000,

⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ == 000.25

400000.000.10C .

We observe that the concentration can take a broad range of prices; any price between 1 and N. Thus:

Ν≤≤ C1 (3)

Any political power system with different and distinct concen-tration C constitutes a political regime.

This conclusion is compatible with the definition of a political regime as given by the constitutional scientists. According to one of these definitions10, “the meaning of a political re-gime coincides with the essential meaning of the Con-stitution”, that is any distinct Constitution represents a form of political regime.

Monarchies and Oligarchies

In these political regimes, the power carriers are being repre-sented by either one person, the monarch, or by a small group of people.

Due to the small number of power carriers, power concentra-tion C is extremely big. Its size is about equal to the number of the citizens. For example, a country with 10 millions of citi-zens has:

• In case of absolute monarchy (Νε = 1)

10 The definition was given by the unforgettable professor of Constitutional law, A. Manessis.

50

10millionsC 10millions1

⎛ ⎞= =⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

• In case of oligarchy (e.g. triumvir Νε = 3) 10 millionsC 3,333millions

3⎛ ⎞= =⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

In such political regimes, the concentration C is depended on the number of people and it increases according it in a linear way. For example, the power concentration in a country of 100 millions of citizens would be ten times bigger than the equiva-lent concentration in a country of 10 millions.

The deterministic outcome of the high degree of political power’s concentration is the downgrading importance of the laws and the conversion of the role of the functional carriers and of the citizens.

The Laws, in monarchies and oligarchies, do not possess the sovereign position as it was mentioned in an earlier discussion of ours (typical architecture of the political regimes schema 2). The monarch or the oligarchic group, are practically situated above all laws even when there exist laws that state the oppo-site.

Energy abides to the laws of Nature and not to the laws of people, even if the latter are constitutional.

The functional carriers are not the deacons of the laws, nor the servants of citizens. Due to the high power concentration are being transformed in the mentioned above anisotropic way.

Citizens, completely alienated from their political power, as time goes by, they are turned into “subjects” of power carriers; at least most of them.

The architecture of monarchy and oligarchy does not have the typical form of schema 2, but it takes the form presented in the following schema 3.

51

Laws

Power carriers

(1)

Functional carriers

(2)

Citizens

(3)

(1) Monarchy or Oligarchy

(2) Anisotropic transformation

of functional carriers

(3) Transformation of citizens

to subjects

Laws

Power carriers(1)

Functional carriers(2)

Citizens

(3)

Memo

Actual connection


(1)

(2)

(3)

Laws

Power carriers

(1)

Functional carriers

(2)

Citizens

(3)

(1) Monarchy or Oligarchy

(2) Anisotropic transformation

of functional carriers

(3) Transformation of citizens

to subjects

Laws

Power carriers(1)

Functional carriers(2)

Citizens

(3)

Memo

Actual connection


(1)

(2)

(3)

Schema 3

Architecture of Monarchies and Oligarchies (Actual form)

Observing the above schema we come to the following out-comes:

• The power carriers do not depend on the laws and they are not committed to them. On the contrary, laws depend on them.

• The functional carriers do not minister the power of the laws but they faithfully serve the power carriers that are si-tuated above the laws.

52

• The citizens are not protected by the laws but instead they are depended on the choices of the power carriers and mainly by the choices of their maidservants. That is the reason why they are converted into “subjects”.

Direct Democracies

In these political regimes, the power carriers are all the citizens through their participation in their General Assembly, their Ec-clesia.

In an ideal Direct Democracy, the number represented by the power carriers is equal to that of the citizens. This leads to the least possible power concentration c=1 and shows that:

• There is no transference of the citizens’ power to other car-riers and as a consequence we notice the absolute validity of the axiom of “non-transferable of citizens’ rights”.

• Concentration does not depend on citizens’ number. For instance, in a country with 1 million citizens and in a coun-try with 100 millions ones, concentration stays the same.

1mil 100 milc 11 mil 100 mil

⎛ ⎞= = =⎜ ⎟

⎝ ⎠.

By virtue of the low power concentration we observe the secur-ing of the following:

a. Of the stability of the laws’ sovereign position. Laws are above everything else.

b. Of the ruler and of being ruled citizens’ status. The susten-ance of this status constitutes the quintessence of Democ-racy.

c. Of the stability of the role undertaken by the functional car-riers that renders them to be the deacons of the laws and the servants of the citizens.

The architecture of Direct Democracies in theory as well as in practice, takes the form of the following schema 4:

53

Laws

Power carriers

(1)

Functional carriers

(2)

Citizens

(3)

(1) Citizens as leaders

(2) Citizens as ruled

Deacons and Servants of laws and citizens

Laws

Power carriers (1)

Functional carriers (3)

Citizens

(2)

Memo

Theoretical and Actual connection

(3)

Leaders

Ecclesia

Laws

Power carriers

(1)

Functional carriers

(2)

Citizens

(3)

(1) Citizens as leaders

(2) Citizens as ruled

Deacons and Servants of laws and citizens

Laws

Power carriers (1)

Functional carriers (3)

Citizens

(2)

Memo

Theoretical and Actual connection

(3)

Leaders

Ecclesia

Schema 4

The architecture of Direct Democracy (Theoretical and Actual form)

The political system of democracy, which was developed in an-cient Greece and more specifically in ancient Athens, presented the architecture of the above schema and it was simply being called democracy.

The term “direct” democracy started being used almost recently when many people understood the important differences that exist between contemporary democracies and ancient Greek democracy.

Indirect Democracies

Within the framework of indirect democracies, most commonly known as representative or parliamentary democracies, the power carriers are being constituted by the citizens’ representa-tives. These representatives come out of the citizens, they are being elected by the citizens and they represent them for a specific period of time.

54

The relation between citizens and representatives, that is the power concentration c, takes medium prices equivalent to a

small fraction of N i.e. , ,200 600 1000Ν Ν Ν⎛ ⎞

⎜ ⎟⎝ ⎠

However, the absolute price of concentration is not the same in all representative democracies. Usually, the bigger the country, the bigger the power concentration gets. This happens due to the fact that the power carriers, for practical reasons, cannot be too many in number.

For example, if in a country of 10 millions of citizens there are 300 power carriers, then a country of 100 millions of citizens should have 3000 power carriers in order that both countries would have the same concentration. Something like that entails many functional difficulties. In any case, the concentration in indirect democracies is in the order of some ten thousands (e.g. from 10 to 50 thousands).

In theory, these medium prices of concentration do not cancel all characteristics of direct democracy, in the way it does in monarchies and oligarchies, but they reduce the stability of the system.

The status of the “ruler and being ruled citizen”, the laws’ sove-reignty and the role of the functional carriers as deacons of the laws and servants of the citizens, is feasible; but it has little stability. The relevantly high power concentration, that very often can become even higher, creates conditions of instability and leads to an easy transition of the institutional form of the political regime to other forms of a more compatible character with the existing power concentration.

The little stability of indirect democracies is not symptomatic. It is deterministic. It is due to the big power concentration. It is due to the existing alienation between citizens and their own power.

55

In indirect democracies, the citizens’ power is limited to their right of choosing their representatives as well as to their right to be also themselves elected as the citizens’ representatives.

However, when put in practice, both these rights are being sig-nificantly reduced even to the point of their annulment.

The election of the citizens’ representatives is being carried ac-cording to rules and most importantly, according to the use of practices defined by the power carriers and not by the citizens. Thus, the decisions concerning the citizens’ choices are prede-fined in a great deal by power carriers.

The theoretical probability of a citizen to become a power carrier is very small (one to 1000 until one to 150000). But the actual possibility, for the majority of citizens, is slight. It is in-significant. While as far as the majority of the citizens is con-cerned this possibility is of no significance, for a number of few people, that possess a big personal of family prestige, it be-comes very big. It is almost a certain fact. Therefore, if we as-pire to the citizens’ acquisition of political power, we should secure this through their citizen’s status and not through their status as a citizens’ representative.

The architecture of indirect democracies, taking into account their determinedly little stability, takes the form presented in the following schema 5.

56

Laws

Power carriers(citizens’ representatives)

Functional carriers

Citizens

Laws

Power carriers(citizens’ representatives)

Functional carriers

Citizens

Schema 5 Architecture of Indirect Democracies

(theoretical-summarizing form)

In order to increase the stability of indirect democracies and to protect them from their potential transition to oligarchies, politi-cal power is being exercised not only by one, but by three in-dependent power carriers: The carrier of legislative power (the parliament), the carrier of the executive power (the govern-ment) and the carrier of the judicial power (the courts and the judges).

The aforementioned separation of the total power leads to the reduction of power concentration and to their reciprocal control and balance between the three independent power carriers.

The separation and the independency of powers was consi-dered to be such a fundamental institution that the article 16 of the French Declaration of 1871 stated that “a state that does not declares the separation of powers does not have a Constitu-tion”, which actually means that it cannot be called a democra-cy.

57

Out of these three carriers of power, only the legislative power –the parliament- can create laws. The other two, government and justice, act according to the laws but they do not have access to their creation.

On account of all the above, the parliament is considered as the main power carrier, a fact that lead to the derivation of the term parliamentary democracy.

The architecture of indirect democracies possessing the impor-tant institution of the separation of powers is being represented in the following schema 6.

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament

Government Justice

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament

Government Justice

Schema 6

The institutional architecture of indirect democracies The architecture of the people’s representatives’ power

Despite the important institution of the separation of powers, in many cases we notice that the natural laws prevail against the human laws, because of the existence relevant high concentra-tion. Thus, very often, indirect democracies are turned into po-litical regimes more compatible with the existing power concen-tration. Obviously, the more compatible forms of that kind are the oligarchies.

58

The above phenomenon of transition is known as the cri-sis of indirect democracies.

A Colleague

From all the things that you said, we get the impression that the characteristics of a political regime are almost irrelevant to the existing laws. How is it possible to note the existence of such a fact when actually it is completely contrary to the legal sense of a political regime?

Colleague –Introducer

The Constitution and the laws of a country define the institu-tional and the theoretical form of a political regime and they certainly have a great and crucial significance.

However, the stability of this institutional form depends mainly on the compatibility of the institutions with the relevant natural laws.

If institutions are not compatible with the natural laws, sooner or later, the essential form will be transformed and it will be-come more compatible with the natural laws.

A Colleague

What is the reason why direct democracy is compatible with the natural laws and as a result its institutional form has stability?


Direct democracy is the political regime based on the natural law according to which all human beings possess power by na-ture and what is more, this power is non-transferable. But since the political power is a necessary condition for the existence of social life and since the individual power is non-transferable, then the only remaining solution is the participation of all citi-zens to the exercise of political power.

59

According to this rationale, direct democracy represents the most compatible with the natural laws political regime and as a result, the most stable, regardless of its drawbacks.

A Colleague

According to your introduction, the power concentration is the most important magnitude of political regimes. But how can the power concentration be possible to exist since political power is non-transferable?


Human beings’ political power is non-transferable in the same way that their spiritual, psychic or mechanical powers are non-transferable to another man. I do not think that there exist a man who believes that his mechanical, his muscle power can be transferred to someone else neither if he wishes so nor if hu-man laws demand it. However, peoples’ mechanical power can be used in constructions ordered by someone else and not by the possessor himself.

A similar thing happens with the political power of man. The usurpation of people’s political power by the power carriers is determinedly impossible. What is possible though is its man-agement, its orientation and its control by the power carriers. However, this possibility is not defined by natural laws. It is defined by human laws that convert it into an insti-tutional right and into force of the power carriers; a force that obviously originates from the citizens and not from the power carriers themselves.

A Colleague

I have the impression that your introduction represents an ef-fort to explain familiar notions in a different way. Therefore, does this effort hold an essential practical value?

60


Any view, no matter how important is considered to be, aims always to the explanation of familiar facts and notions. That also goes for my introduction. I think that any practical value of this effort lies to the perspective that political power is energy and as such we should deal with it. The use of this conception would be an addition to the existing principles and methods concerning the research and the development of political sys-tems and to the principles and methods used concerning the energy systems. These methods, by common consent, have been greatly developed and generally acknowledged for their reliability and their effectiveness.

61

Discussion of 7th March

Subject: The case of Athenian Democracy


The word Democracy is Greek. It was created by the synthesis of the words Demos (Δήμος) and Kratos (Κράτος).

Demos in ancient Athens meant the total of the citizens. Citi-zens were the subtotal of the inhabitants of a city that had the right to vote. That had the right to participate to the taking of decisions about matters that concerned the city and its inhabi-tants.

Kratos in Greek, (aeolic kretos, sanscritic kratu) means power, force, authority.

Therefore, Democracy means the power of Demos, namely the power of citizens.

In Athenian Democracy, the only power carrier was the general assembly of the citizens; the Ecclesia of Demos.

The Ecclesia represented the legislative, executive and judicial power of contemporary democracies. That is, the citizens of the Athenian Democracy had the power to create laws, to govern and to judge; all political power was in their hands.

The functional carriers were called leaders (άρχοντες). The word leader (άρχοντας) derives from the word beginning (αρχή) and defined the citizens whose position was in front of an “or-ganized formation”, those at the head, the leaders.

The leaders had no actual political power. They did not create laws, they did not decide the policies, they did not judge. The leaders were the deacons of Ecclesia and the servants of the citizens. And this was not a theory or a verbalism, it was a reality put in everyday practice. If the political power of Ecclesia was exercised by a man or by few men, then the politi-

62

cal regime was no longer called democracy. It was called mo-narchy, oligarchy, tyranny.

The leaders were citizens chosen by the citizens either through being voted or by being given an alternated term, or by draw-ing lots.

In Ecclesia, leaders and citizens had the same political power; One vote.

The architecture of Athenian Democracy coincides with the ar-chitecture of Direct Democracy which was mentioned in an ear-lier conversation (schema 4). It is the architecture that secures the citizens’ status as rulers and as ruled over.

Despite the aforementioned principles and philosophy of Athe-nian Democracy, some simple citizens as well as some experts consider it to be an antipopular, elitist, utopist and ineffective political system. A political system, whose creation was based on the favorable circumstances created by the use of slaves.

Still is this view right? Is it simply a mistaken view? Is it a pur-posefully misrepresented view?

Let us attempt a brief survey of these views.

The view of antipopular and elitist political system

By studying the philosophy and the principles of these political systems, we easily come to the absolutely contrary conclusion: Athenian Democracy was an original popular political regime; the most popular regime than any other that ever existed in all countries and through all the years. There are no objections to this principle.

Thus, where lies the support to this statement for the antipopu-lar and elitist character of this political regime?

This statement’s support lies to the existence of one of the laws of Athenian Democracy. The law that defined to whom could be attributed the status of the citizen.

63

According to this law, the status of citizen was being attributed only to men.

Slaves, women, under aged men, metics and people convicted for crimes could not possess this status.

The aforementioned view is based on the existence of this law and specifically on the existence of slavery.

However, a political regime should be judged for its philosophy and its principles and not for the existence of a good or a bad law. Tyrannies created some good laws. But these laws did not serve as the justification of the political regime of tyranny.

Laws usually express the spirit and the needs of a country and of a specific era. That is the reason why they are being changed.

When somebody asked Solon11 which law is the right one, he answered: “For which country and for which era you ask?”

Still, apart from the relevant character of the laws’ righteous-ness, it is also interesting to mention the comparison of the following institution in contemporary democracies and in Athe-nian Democracy.

a) Citizens’ vote In Ancient Athens, citizens used to vote in order to exercise the legislative, government and judicial power and to choose their leaders.

In contemporary democracies, citizens vote in order to choose the power carriers and not in order to exercise political power themselves.

But even this limited power of citizens started being exercised not earlier than only just 200 years ago.

11 Solon was a famous leader - legislator in ancient Athens (6th century BC) .

64

b) Slavery In Athenian Democracy, by violation of natural and moral prin-ciples, slavery existed and what is more, it existed typically and practically without any hypocritical excuses.

However, when this law was typically abolished in modern so-cieties? When it was really abolished?

As far as its typical abolishment is concerned there is a clear answer; but what about its true abolishment? Let our con-science give an answer to that.

c) Women’s right to vote In Ancient Athens women were not attributed the citizen status. They did not have the right to vote. Nevertheless, this violation of natural and moral laws existed even in modern democracies. For instance, women gained the right to vote: In Russia in 1917, in England in 1918, in Italy in 1923, in France in 1946, in Greece in 1953.

Why we are stricter when judging the Athenian Democracy of the 3rd century BC, than when judging the French Democracy of the 20th century AC.? This does not represent an unfair and biased judgment?

d) The other institutions The deprivation of the right to vote for the under aged, me tics and for those convicted for crimes, exists more or less even in our days.

The concentration of political power

As it was mentioned in another of our discussions, an objective index that expresses the spirit of a political regime is the power concentration C. This is represented by the ratio of the number of people N to the number of the power carriers Nε. Thus:

εΝ=NC

65

In the case of the ideal direct democracy where all human be-ings are citizens and all citizens are power carriers, that is N=Nε, the concentration C has the smallest possible price C=1

Because in Athenian Democracy slaves and women did not have the citizen’s status, the concentration would not have the price C=1 but another, higher price.

If we accept that every Athenian citizen had an average num-ber of three (3) slaves – a relation compatible to the existing information concerning the number of inhabitants and of citi-zens – then the concentration would be C=4 instead of C=1.

Likewise, if we accept that every Athenian – citizen or slave – had one wife, then the concentration would be C=8 instead of C=4.

We observe that power concentration in Athenian Democracy was 8 times bigger than that of the ideal direct democracy. Al-so, estimations based on historical data about inhabitants and citizens result in a power concentration 5 to 8 (inhabitants, in-cluding slaves: 250.000 to 318.000 , citizens: 31.000 to 55.000 ) 12.

Still, even this concentration is very small when compared with the concentration in the political regimes of monarchy, oli-garchy and indirect democracy.

Table 1 that follows includes the typical prices of concentration C in a country of 10 millions of citizens for the four basic forms of political regimes and for the political regime of the Athenian Democracy. It is easy to estimate the prices of concentration but they were already mentioned in a previous discussion of ours.

12 M. Sakellariou, Athenian Democracy

66

Table 1 Power concentration in the basic political regimes

(typical prices in a country of 10 millions of inhabitants)

No. Political regime Concentration C Notes

1 Monarchy (Nε = 1) 10.000.000 C proportional to N

2 Oligarchy (Nε = 3) 3.333.000 C proportional to N

3 Indirect Democracy (Nε = 400) 25.000 C increasing with N

4 Ideal Direct Democracy (Nε = N) 1 C independent to N

5 Athenian Democracy 8 C independent to N

By observing table 1, we come to the following conclusions:

1. Changes in the philosophy of the political systems, create alterations in the scale (class of size) of power concentration index, ( C = millions-thousands-units).

2. Changes in laws that do not modify the philosophy, create significantly smaller alterations of it, which however do not change the class of size of index (C=1 or c=8).

3. The power concentration class of size is:

o In monarchies-oligarchies: Tens of millions (107-108)

o In Indirect Democracies: Tens of thousands (104-105)

o In Direct Democracies: Units (100-101).

The contribution of slaves

Some people claim that the political regime of Athenian Democ-racy was in fact a creation of the use of slaves. Without the slaves, the Athenians would necessarily be preoccupied with their survival and they would not be practically able to occupy themselves with the exercise of political power.

This view is not absurd. But it leads to the following two ques-tions:

67

1. Why other people who have used slaves, in the same or greater extent, did not develop the regime of democracy and the same civilization?

2. Thanks to technology, people nowadays have at their dis-posal “slaves-machines”, able to perform more tasks than the “slaves-people” of the past. Still, why the citizens’ par-ticipation to the exercise of political power today is of no significance when compared to that of the citizens of the Athenian Democracy?

The Athenian Democracy is not a creation based on slavery. It is a creation of the spiritual and moral power of the Athenians. It is a creation of their culture.

Consequently, the view suggesting that the Athenian Democra-cy was an antipopular and elitist political regime is unfounded and unfair. Possibly, it is not just a mistaken view. Possibly, it is an intentional misrepresentation of truth that took place in or-der to support the oligarchic regimes.

The view of an utopist and ineffective political regime

Just like any political regime, the Athenian Democracy pre-sented functional problems and drawbacks. The most important were:

• The low flexibility and speed to take decisions. This draw-back is specifically important in cases of urgent needs and wars that require immediate decisions to be taken.

• The difficulty in informing citizens of questionable spiritual and moral powers as well as the questionable rationality of their decisions, factors that determinedly exist in every set of citizens, in every society.

• The creation of leaders according to the institution of alter-nated terms or that of random election. This institution caused the negative criticism of the political regime be-cause citizens were assuming this role due to the fact that

68

it was simply their turn and not because they were the most competent.

• The existence of circumstances that favored the citizens’ demagogy and as a result the taking of wrong decisions due to the aforementioned drawbacks.

The view suggesting that the Athenian Democracy was a uto-pist and ineffective political regime was based on these draw-backs. Still, although these disadvantages are true, the conclu-sions drawn are mistaken for two reasons:

(1) The assessment of a political regime should be based both on its virtues and on its drawbacks and not only based on the latter.

(2) The truth that lies in any estimation, in any theory regard-less of its substantiating thoroughness, can only be verified trough its practice.

At this exact point we face a big logic contradiction. The classic Athenian civilization is undoubtedly considered to be unique and unsurpassable. This civilization reached its zenith during the years of the Athenian Democracy. Thus, how can it be possible that the political regime that gave birth to the greatest civilization ever to be considered as utopist and ineffective?

The causes of ancient Greek civilization

The uniqueness and the greatness of the classic Athenian civili-zation created the plausible question: Why only in Athens and why only during that time in Athens, this civilization was developed?

Many answers were given to this question. According to the most well known, classical Greek civilization:

1. Constitutes the continuation of another great and unknown culture that lies buried in the bottom of the Aegean Sea, in the depths of the east Mediterranean Sea. This view was

69

significantly corroborated by the archaeological findings in the Cape of Thira.13

2. Is due to the particularly favorable climatic conditions of Attica which were the cause for “the open mind of Greeks”. Some experts claim that the most significant difference be-tween the Ancient Greek civilization and the European civili-zation is that the first was developed in open spaces, in en-vironments created by nature and light and the second into closed man-made spaces. The clarity, the simplicity and the sphericity of the ancient Greek civilization stems from this difference.

3. Was created by extra terrestrials that came once to Greece. There is an attempt to support this view by using argu-ments taken from the Greek mythology, which is consi-dered to be the blurred reminiscence of extraterrestrial presence and not simply an imaginative creation of the an-cient Greeks.

4. Was developed in Athens that time because it was dur-ing that time that true democracy existed in Athens. The time coincidence of the peak of the classic civilization and of democracy cannot be a random incident. On the con-trary, it is a fact that answers the question about space and time.

Thus, the view suggesting that this political regime was utopian and ineffective is contrary to the historical factuality. It is a big mistake. It is just hot air that it is not supported accidentally but it aims to the creation of false impressions or to the support of the political regimes where political power lies in the hands of the few.

13 These findings belong to an era older than the historical years of ancient Greece

70

A Colleague

Why contemporary political regimes use the name of democ-racy but they do not function based on the same principles that the Athenian Democracy used to?


The main precondition for the development and the function of a democratic political system, like the one that existed in an-cient Athens, is the good communication conditions. The exis-tence of such conditions, ensure the spreading of information as well as the cooperation between the citizens; conditions that are the basis of democracy.

Generally in ancient Greece as well as in ancient Athens, the good communication conditions were ensured by the way socie-ties were organized, namely in countries small in terms of their expansion and of the number of their inhabitants, and by the existing mild climate. Thanks to these two factors, Athenians could easily move from one place to another and get gathered together in open spaces that provided favourable cooperation conditions.

That kind of conditions could not be found in the later countries in Europe. The countries in Europe covered vast expanses populated by big numbers of people and their climatic condi-tions were worse than those found in Greece.

Finally, technology until the last decade of the 20th century could not secure a good communication environment equal to that created by the actual gathering of people. That is, it could not provide interactive, low cost and universal communication.

The above reasons lead to the need for the regeneration of Democracy in its indirect form.

A Colleague

Is there another serious reason that lead to the indirect form of democracy?

71


Indeed, there is. That is, people’s different cultures.

In Greece, since Homer’s years a political regime of a non for-mal democracy was already put in practice. Engels14 called it, “Spontaneous Democracy of heroic years”. Spontaneous De-mocracy was alive for thousands of years and gave birth to the “citizen culture” possessed by the ancient Greeks.

On the contrary, European countries have always been monar-chic and feudal, creating thus the “subject’s culture”.

This difference in culture is equal to the different procedures followed until the birth of the two democracies.

Athenian Democracy stemmed from the transformation of Spontaneous Democracy, while Contemporary De-mocracy stemmed from the transformation of feudalism and monarchies.

A Colleague

Which drawbacks of the Athenian Democracy, are they sys-tematic negative factors in the functioning of similar political regimes?


I think that systematic negative factors are the low speed and flexibility in the taking of decisions, the diminished number of initiatives taken by the powerless leaders and the citizens’ demagogy.

A Colleague

The underlying rationalism of the decisions does not constitute an important drawback?

14 Friedrich Engels, German philosopher and theorist of socialism (1820-1895).

72

Is it possible that the decisions taken by those few that were chosen by virtue of their knowledge and of their greater spiri-tual and moral powers can be as rational as those taken by many simple citizens of Ecclesia?


Your question is very important but its phrasing can lead to false conclusions. If we compare the rationalism of the simple people with that possessed by experts with great spiritual and moral powers (special men), obviously the latter prevails.

But there is no such comparison in practice. In practice, we should compare the rationalism of a system of political power based on the few chosen experts, true and fake special men, with the rationalism of a system based on the knowledge and on the wisdom of the many.

In the framework of a such comparison, we should also take into account factors like the probability to choose true special men, the transgressions of natural and moral laws that there are in the two alternative solutions, the people’s acceptance of the decisions taken by the few or by the total of citizens and so on. Only, this kind of comparison can lead to reliable conclu-sions and not the one suggested prima facie by your question.

Nevertheless, the subject of your question is very important. For that reason, we can possibly examine it in depth during a next discussion.

A Colleague

What is the fundamental difference between the democracy created by the ancient Greek spirit and the contemporary de-mocracy?


In my opinion, the fundamental difference lies in the philoso-phical, institutional and mainly practical sense of the state.

73

In the Athenian Democracy, the state was identified with the citizens15 and this can be presented briefly by the relation:

Κράτος (state)= citizens

In contemporary indirect democracies, despite the reasonable maneuvers and appeals, the state is not identified with the citi-zens and this can be presented by the relation:

Κράτος (state)≠citizens

The fact that in contemporary democracies the state “springs from the citizens and exists for them”, suggests a very interest-ing although indefinite relation, that does not constitute iden-tification of state and citizens.

Citizens realize the above difference and for that reason they usually identify the state with the name of the leader of the governing political party. For that they say: the state of Kara-manlis, the state of Papandreou.

In those times they used to say: the Athenians’ state and not the state of Athens or the state of Pericles’.

The title of Aristotle’s’ book: “Αθηναίων Πολιτεία” (The Athe-nians’ State) is a written proof of the above view.

Another fundamental difference produced from the above, is the next one: In Athenian democracy, transparency was an objective characteristic of the political system, while in contemporary democracies this is a subjective cha-racteristic of the few true power-carriers.

15 In ancient Greece the name of the state was defined by the name of the citizens and not by the name of the country. They should call it: the state of Englishmen and not the state of England.

74

Discussion of 28th March

Subject: The deterministic instability of indirect democracies


The instability of a natural system depends on the concentra-tion of energy and it is proportional to it. The greater the con-centration, the bigger the instability observed in the system. If the energy concentration is constantly increasing, the system becomes deformed and consequently transformed to a different system that gets eventually destroyed in an intense and sudden way.

What it is valid for the natural energy systems goes also for the people’s political power systems, for the political regimes; their instability is proportional to the power concentration N/Nε.

Within this logical framework, oligarchies constitute political systems of great instability, indirect democracies of medium instability and direct democracies of minimum instability.

The power concentration of oligarchies and direct democracies takes extreme and specific prices. The concentration of oligar-chies is maximum and of direct democracies minimum, in the-ory as well as in practice. The extreme and specific price of concentration, render the prediction concerning their evolve-ment easy comprehensible.

On the contrary, in indirect democracies, the figure of concen-tration is blurred and ambiguous. Concentration in practice is different than in theory.

Let us attempt to enable the understanding of the above view:

We will suppose that in a country of 10 millions of citizens (N=10.000.000) and of 4 hundred representatives (Nε=400), the majority has 260 deputies and the minority 140.

75

Let us now try to estimate the power concentration that exists in theory as well as in practice.

In theory, the sovereign power carrier is the parliament where the deputies decide in a free, unrestrained and autonomous way. Thus, the concentration of power is considered to be the same for all 400 deputies and its price is 25.000

⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ = 000.25

400000.000.10

.

Obviously, the political power possessed by the majority group and by the minority group is:

Group Power of group16

Majority 260 x 25.000 = 6.500.000

Minority 140 x 25.000 = 3.500.000

Total 10.000.000

Nevertheless, the aforementioned theoretical distribution does not exist in practice. In practice we observe a different one, which approximate to the following:

Group Power of group

Majority 10.000.000

Minority ∅

Total 10.000.000

That is, in practice all the state power is accumulated to the majority party; in practice, the minority party has no power. “The first takes all and the second nothing”, the philosophy that stood for the feudal states concerning the children’s rights in inheritance. The first- born son inherited everything.

16 The political power of the group Pg is proportional to the number N of the citizens represented by the group

76

But let us accept that the above distribution is extreme and that a closer in practice distribution of political power to the groups is the following:

Group Power of group

Majority 9.000.000

Minority 1.000.000

Total 10.000.000

If the power of the majority was equally distributed to its 260 members then the concentration of force would be increased

from 25.000 to 35.000 ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ ≈ 000.35

260000.000.9

.

However, is it possible that all deputies can decide in a free, unrestrained and autonomous way? Do all the deputies of the majority possess the same force?

Such a claim could cause an ironic smile even to the least in-formed citizen.

It is known to everyone that the political power of the majority group is practically concentrated to very few institutional and non institutional carriers. An indicative price of the actual con-centration could be drawn out of the acceptance of the fact that the 80% of the majority’s political power is in the hands of 10 people.

Such an acceptance equals to the existence of concentration

720.000 ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ ≈ 000.720

10000.000.9x8,0

instead of the theoretical of

25.000. The actual concentration is too bigger than that esti-mated theoretically. In the case of our example is 29 times big-

ger. ⎟⎠⎞

⎜⎝⎛ ≈ 29

000.25000.720

.

According to the energy conception of political power, a political regime with such a great concentration is situated closer to the

77

oligarchies than to the democracies (see table 1, discussion 7th March).

This modification of power concentration results in the down-grading of the role of the parliament and in the upgrading of the role of the executive authority; that is the government.

Who does not know that the laws and the policies are being exclusively created by the government according to the deci-sions taken by the governing majority which is also the majority in the parliament?

Who does not know that the laws and the policies are being systematically approved exclusively by the deputies of the gov-ernment party while being voted down by the deputies of the opposition parties?

All these demonstrate the institutional architecture presented in schema 6, the architecture of all representatives’ political power, does not take place in practice.

The architecture of schema 7 represents what actually happens in practice. That is the architecture of political power of the ma-jority’s representatives.

78

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament

Government

Justice

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament

Government

Justice

Schema 7

Actual architecture of Indirect Democracies Architecture of political power of the majority’s representatives.

In many cases, the deviation from the institutional architecture is even bigger that that represented in schema 7. In those cases, the sovereign power carrier is not the institutional carrier of government. It is a blurry and difficult to define carrier which constitutional scientists call “governing majority”. It includes the people who really plan, construct and control the majorities. In this case, the architecture takes the form presented in schema 8.

79

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament Government Justice

GoverningMajority

Laws

Power carriers

Functional carriers

Citizens

Parliament Government Justice

GoverningMajority

Schema 8

Actual architecture of Indirect Democracies Architecture of political power of the governing majority

The existing power concentration according to schemas 6, 7 and 8 is 25.000, 35.000 and 720.000 respectively.

Still, what is the underlying structure of indirect democracies and how do they function in most countries?

According to the architecture in schema 6, in schema 7 or in schema 8? True political power belongs to the citizens’ repre-sentatives, to the majority’s representatives or to the “govern-ing majority”?

80

The above question can get a reliable answer only if we take into account the data of space and time; when this question refers to a specific country and to a specific period of time. Without taking into account that data, any answer can be equally reliable and unreliable.

A certain answer is that all three architectures stand true but with different probability of existence for each one. The archi-tecture in schema 8, which represents the final outcome of the transitions, has bigger probability. The conclusion that indi-rect democracies have a deterministic instable founda-tion is certain.

The cause of the aforementioned instability is the high power concentration that is created in practice despite the contrary institutional commands.

Sooner or later, indirect democracies have to proceed to actions of “propping up” the system in order to acquire the necessary stability.

For many years, this “propping up” is being attempted through the use of the basically same two ways: through violence and lies; through threats and the use of violence and through the creation of untrue perceptions and untrue expectations.

The “propping up’s” philosophy, has not changed through the thousands of years. That has changed is just their aesthetic “wrapping”.

Nowadays, the propping up has more sophisticated aesthetics that it used to have. It uses, the aesthetics attained through the practice of the ambivalent science of communication poli-tics.

A Colleague

You are mentioning very often in your introduction the view that the instability of indirect democracies has a deterministic character. Who are the arguments that support this view of yours?

81

The Law of Entropy in Social Systems


This view is based on the existing experience and on the law of entropy.

Experience teaches us that all social procedures lead by princi-ple to the increase of power concentration and not to the repa-triation of it to its natural carriers, to the citizens.

The law of entropy that stands for all systems and consequently for the political power systems, teaches that “ all spontaneous procedures that place in nature are orientated towards the en-tropy’s increase”.

Still, an increase in the power concentration equals to the in-crease of entropy no matter if the latter is defined as the meas-ure of ataxia or as the reciprocal of the measure of information. Thus, the law of entropy as far as the social systems are con-cerned can be phrased as follows: “All spontaneous proce-dures are orientated towards the increase of the power concentration”.

Consequently, the increase of concentration is deterministic.

It is useful to remind that the law of entropy has statistical va-lidity.

A Colleague

Your arguments are appeared rational. Still, how can we explain the fact that most people, simple citizens as well as experts, ignore to a great extent this deterministic aspect? Is it just a view of little reliability which is called deterministic in order to strain after effects?


It is a fact that statistical laws have small prestige and their acceptance is actually very limited.

82

This small prestige is due to the opinion that the outcomes of the laws should possess a deterministic certainty and not just a high probability. Besides, until recently there was no such sense as a statistical law. This sense was created by modern physics in the 20th century after the formulation of the principle of un-certainty.

The above reason explains why most people when they talk about laws they have in mind a deterministic form of them where the outcome has an absolute and argumented certainty.

That is the reason why people outspokenly and fearlessly ig-nore the statistical law written on cigarettes’ boxes: “smoking can cause serious damage to health”. Or its more recent phras-ing: “smoking kills”.

A Colleague

You suggested that in practice, indirect democracies have one of the three power architectures: of the people’s representa-tives, of the majority’s representatives and of the governing majority. Which one is implemented in practice?


To get a reliable answer you have to add to your question the data of the country and of the time period. Without them your question is indefinite. The transition of indirect democracies from one architecture to the other is taking place in fast speed and in many cases we observe a different architecture at the beginning and a different one at the end of the power period of the same leader.

Personally, I believe that during our days the most usual archi-tecture for indirect democracies is the one of the governing ma-jority; the one presented in schema 8.

A Colleague

You mentioned that in the framework of contemporary democ-racies all the force borne by the citizens is transferred to the majority’s party in the same way that in feudal systems all par-

83

ents’ holdings were being transferred to the hands of the first born son.

Nevertheless the control of those that are governing is within the competence of the minority’s parties. You do not consider this control competence, as very important and as a factor that constitutes a form of political power?


I consider this ability to control as important but I believe that it does not constitute a form of political power in the contempo-rary democracies.

Political power is the ability to take and to implement decisions. The minority does not have this ability.

An outcome of the lack of power in minorities is the modifica-tion of the goals of the aforementioned competence. It is crys-tal clear that in our days the exercise of political control does not take place in order to improve the state’s decisions but in-stead, due to the minority’ s aspirations to conquer the political power.

Control is used to conquer and not to exercise the political power. This explains the fact why the minority is systematically considering all decisions taken by the majority as false and catastrophic, while the latter presents them as wise and saving. The few exceptions do not cancel the rule.

However, it is not possible that both views stand at the same time. Beyond any doubt, one of them - either that of the minor-ity or that of the majority – is a lie or an absurdity.

That obviously means that both parties’ attempts contain an average 50% of lies or absurdities that do not aim at the exer-cise and at the control of political power but rather to its pres-ervation and conquering.

Nevertheless, citizens do not believe that deduction.

84

Some of them believe that what the minority claims is 100% lie or absurdity and others believe the contrary.

This absurd situation was summarized by a great politician in the following historic phrase: “Telearea became an enormous mental hospital”.

A Colleague

According to my perception, the instability of a political regime depends on the power concentration and it is being improved through the latter’s reduction.

Still, the quality of a political regime is not defined solely on the basis of its stability but also through the estimation of other indicative magnitudes that all together form what we call in technology the overall quality.

My question is what is the impact on the overall quality when the power concentration is reduced?


Your question sets the problem to the right basis. You reached to the heart of the problem that concerns the political power systems.

Nevertheless, your question will serve as the subject of a future discussion. I suppose of the one following our next one.

85

Discussion of 4thApril

Subject: The three appeals of political power


The power carriers are aware of the fact that they do not pos-sess power but they just manage citizens’ power.

They are also aware of the fact that they can never appropriate the citizens’ power and that this determinist weakness stands as the cause of the instability that exists in the systems that they manage and exploit.

Nevertheless, the truthfulness lying in these facts is something that people should not learn and should not believe. Peo-ple must believe in something that can put their mind to bed and that will generate feelings of hope, fear and excitement. Only these feelings, and never the mind, will enable the carte blanche assignment of people’s power to others.

All political regimes, where there is alienation of citizens from their own power, are determinedly instable.

In order to be achieved an acceptable stability it was necessary to invent and to use effective “propping ups”.

These “propping ups” systems, fabricated very soon; thousands years ego. They were the calls for help, the appeals: to God, to Country, to Society and to the political power of People.

Through these appeals, the power carriers succeeded in be-coming in people’s conscience a closed group of people, a caste, of human beings, that possess special spiritual and moral abilities; to become a caste of experts in expressing, in serving and in securing: The will of God, the society end country needs and the people’s power exercising.

86

The appeal of God

According to this appeal, the power carriers are the creations of God’s will and not the creation of people’s will. God’s will lead to the “monarchies by the grace of God”.

In some cases, God’s will proved to be an insufficient “propping up”. Thus, a stronger one was invented. The power carriers became themselves Gods as, for instance, Egypt’s Pharaohs. In other case, they just had to compromise to the position of God’s official representatives. They undertook the role of Mes-siah.

With the use of this appeal, the decisions taken by the power carriers became infallible since they actually represented God’s will. Any attempt to doubt or to criticize them, constituted a crime and a blasphemy.

As it was expected, this concept put the importance of political power’s carriers above any law. The laws had value and validity only if they abided to the choices of power carriers, that is to God’s will.

The functional carriers should serve the commands and the wishes of Godlike power carriers and not of laws.

Finally, the citizens could only hope to the protection of power and functional carriers. The protection of laws became power-less, almost non existent.

A second important outcome of this appeal was the transforma-tion of religious officials into not formal power carriers. Not formal but essential ones.

The appeal of country and society

According to this appeal, the power carriers have as first and dominant goal the therapy of the serious and urgent needs of the country and of the society. The management of people’s power has to aim at this therapy. The rest could follow.

This appeal is evolved in two phases:

87

In the first phase, all citizens should understand the great dan-gers that the country and the society face. There always exist such kind of dangers. If not, they can be invented.

In the second phase, all citizens should acknowledge the spe-cial spiritual, moral, bodily or other abilities possessed by some people who can quickly and effectively cure these needs.

After the completion of the second phase, the presuppositions for the effective support of an oligarchic political regime are already created.

The appeal of the country and of the society fills the citizens with feelings of nobility, altruism and excitement that, by prin-ciple, will not be used for the support of the country and of the society but contrary, for the support of the system of political power.

Through this appeal, all the decisions taken by the political power are justified since they aim to the therapy needs of the country and of the society that have the first priority. Any doubting of them represents the scorn and the hostility towards the country and the society. It is considered as a treason and a crime. The end is above everything. The end justifies the means.

The appeal of people’s power

This appeal forms the most perfect and the most effective “propping up” invention made by the caste of the professional managers of people’s power. It also constitutes the “propping up” with the highest aesthetics and the greatest safety.

Who can dispute the political power of the people? Who will choose to fight his own self?

In the political regimes where the citizens’ power constitutes an appeal and not a reality, their essential form has an oligarchic character. But it is not only that. The worst thing is that in these political regimes strengthened the notion that the power carriers are in reality irresponsible. Those responsible are the

88

citizens that every four years they are supposedly choosing the programs, the policies and the representatives –power carriers. The power carriers and the political systems are logical, moral and institutional irresponsible ones.

When seeking those who have the responsibility, we are limited to a garrulous and ineffective criticism; just to have something to talk about.

The people’s power appeal is evolved in two phases of relatively big duration; bigger than those concerning the appeal of the country and society.

The first phase includes the creation of the perception that the exercise of political power by the people themselves constitutes a determinist weakness. Something like the second kind of for-ever moving which although accords to the first law of thermo-dynamics, the law of energy conservation, is contrary to the second law of thermodynamics, the law of entropy.

The second phase includes the creation of the perception that only suitable representatives of the people can successfully exercise their own power. If political power is exercised by peo-ple with high moral and spiritual powers and yet is proved to be problematic, then what are the problems we observe when po-litical power is exercised by simple people? by people, who do not care and do not want to participate in the exercise of politi-cal power? by people, who do not want to undertake the re-sponsibilities their representatives undertake?

The ability given to simple citizens to exercise their own politi-cal power, with no need of hard work, with no responsibilities to undertake and in an excellent way, just by choosing once every four years the most competent and the most virtuous for this job, it is indeed a very great invention.

The effectiveness of this appeal was proved to be great in prac-tice; greater than that of the other appeals.

These favourable features multiplied the appeal’s appearances and improved its structural and functional details.

89

Some people claim that its perfection was accomplished during the last years thanks to the technology used by the Mass Me-dia. Still, the forecast of its value and of its abilities has taken place many years ago.

Here is what has been written by the Italian politician and po-litical researcher Nicolo Machiavelli (1449-1527) some 500 years ago:

“The ruler has to take great care in order that every action to which he proceeds to seems as an outcome springing out of the people according to the commands and with the consent of the latter while still using such a way that is not the people that governs, people just remains as a point of reference for every political power”.

Another statement relevant to the third appeal is the one made by the deputy and former minister Red Blooman who, sincerely and courageously shed light to the way through which citizens choose their representatives in Telearea. The statement was made in the summer of 2005 and goes as follows: “My seat in the parliament belongs in reality to the president Blue Green-man and if he thinks that this is wrong, he can take it back”.

This statement, although it is contrary to the dominant percep-tion that the seats of the Parliament belong to the people, did not bother and did not cause a problem to any of the experts, the politicians or the simple citizens. Without to have worries or scruples, they all kept talking about simple citizens’ power and by extension about their responsibilities; they kept giving statements, in loud voice, about the past and the future deci-sions of the “people-ruler”.

In despite of the great effectiveness of this appeal, its philoso-phy is absurd and not compatible with the natural and moral laws.

I do not know exactly the reason why but this whole matter brings to my mind the following humorous little story: Two men are travelling with the train that goes from Athens to Thessalo-

90

nica. They are seating in the same wagon but the first is seat-ing looking towards the direction of Thessalonica and the sec-ond looking towards the direction of Athens. At some point of the run, the second traveller asks the first traveller:

- What is your destination, sir?

- Thessalonica, he answers.

For a moment, the second traveller gets upset. He stays thoughtful for a while and then, full of joy and satisfaction, he says:

- Oh dear. I took the train in Larissa and I travel to Athens. I seat in front of you and I face the direction to Athens. In this way, you will go to Thessalonica and me to Athens.

A Colleague

Is there a corresponding relation between the forms of the political regimes and the forms of the appeals?


There is a corresponding relation that its standing has not a certain character but a great probability.

By principle, God’s appeal is used by the monarchies, country’s and society’s appeal by the oligarchies and exercise people’s power appeal by the contemporary indirect democracies; at least by many of them.

A Colleague

The election of our representatives, the programs made by the political parties, the candidates’ “contracts with the people”, the candidates’ “promises and commitments” to the people, all these things that take place in our contemporary democracies are considered to be just hot air? They do not represent a form of the people’s power?

91


All the things that you mentioned can represent the real power of the people but they can also represent just the appeal of their power.

A reliable estimation can only be done for a specific country and for a specific period of time.

My general estimation –the estimation of a simple citizen- is that in most contemporary democracies all the things that you mentioned as tokens of people’s power, are simply hot air and they have nothing to do with logic of the system but instead they are outcomes of the appeal’s aesthetics.

A Colleague

By listening to your introduction we come to the conclusion that all political regimes are founded on the basis of an appeal. Is there a political regime that does not use that kind of support?


Indeed, there is. It is the political regime where the political power does simply spring out of the citizens but it is exercised by the citizens. In such a political regime there is no need for an appeal. It does not have a reason of existence. Such a politi-cal regime was the Athenian Democracy where political power was exercised by the general assembly of the citizens: The Ecclesia of Demos.

92

Discussion of 11th April.

Subject: The overall quality of political systems


The overall quality characteristics of a political regime are many. Still, the most important of them are the following:

(1) The rationale of its decision. The ability to take right deci-sions, based on the collection and logic process of all data included in a problem.

(2) The flexibility. The ability to take decisions in a short time after the appearance of a problem or of an alteration of its given data.

(3) The transparency. The existence of circumstances that secure the easy, full and objective provision of information to all citizens alike.

(4) The stability. The stable character of institutions. The ac-cordance between the spirit and the letter of institutions. In case of low stability-instability-, we observe an altera-tion of the institutions’ spirit and not of their letter. It is their essence that changes and not their typical form.

(5) The acceptance. The spontaneous and unforced acknowl-edgement of the institutions’ prestige

(6) The arbitrariness. The violation of the institutions’ spirit and letter; the decision making based on rules different than the institutional ones. According to this definition the instability is equivalent to semi-arbitrariness.

(7) The corruption. The purposeful damage and distortion of institutions and rules that aims at the gratification of the di-rect and indirect interests of power and functional carriers. Usually, the distortion is much greater in the essence of the institutions than it is in their typical forms. Corruption

93

and instability have many similarities as far as their results. They present differences only as far as their goals are concerned. Corruption is driven by wrenched intentions while instability can be possibly driven by well-meant ones

(8) The arrogance. The uninterested and scornful facing of the citizens by the power carriers and functional carriers.

It is self-evident that the quality can be improved when there is an increase of the characteristics (1) to (5) and a reduction of the characteristics (6) to (8).

It is also concluded from the above definitions that the stabili-ty is strongly correlated with the arbitrariness and the corruption of the system; that the stability is a manda-tory characteristic of the system.

In the same way that goes for other systems, the overall quality of political systems is expressed by the balanced sum 17 of the above (1) to (8) quality characteristics.

We will not attempt to estimate the overall quality in this dis-cussion. Nevertheless, we will attempt to assess the existing relation between the power concentration and the aforemen-tioned characteristics.

This relation easily results from the prices that these characte-ristics take within the framework of the two political regimes that present the minimum and the maximum power concentra-tion; the political regime of direct democracy where the concen-tration takes the minimum price (C=1) and the absolute mo-narchy where the concentration takes the maximum price (C=N).

But let us attempt to assess all the above characteristics apart from the one concerning the rationale of the decisions, which

17 Such a summation presupposes the existence methods and units of measur-ing the characteristics, as well as the sanction weighing factors for each of them.

94

will be separately examined in a future discussion as it consti-tutes a more complicated problem.

Flexibility and concentration

Flexibility is maximized in absolute monarchies (maximum c) and it is minimized in direct democracies (minimum c).

This logic relation has be expressed allegorically by the well known proverb: “too many cooks spoil the broth”

As we will see in the followings, flexibility is the only quality characteristic that gets improved by the increase of political power concentration.

Transparency and concentration

Transparency, as well as all the rest quality characteristics gets improved by the reduction of power concentration.

Transparency is systematically maximized in direct democracies (minimum c), because all citizens are power carriers and as a consequence, they are “sources” of information.

In direct democracies the limitation of information has neither meaning nor practical possibility, so the transparency is max-imized.

The contrary is being observed in the political regime of abso-lute monarchy (maximum c) where transparency is systemati-cally minimized.

Stability and concentration

The stability of political systems gets improved by the re-duction of power concentration, as it was mentioned in detail during our previous discussions. “My power is the love of people”, kings used to say and the reason why is obvious.

Acceptance and concentration

The reduction of power concentration equals obviously to a bigger participation of people in the taking of decisions and that leads to the systematic increase of acceptance.

95

Arbitrariness and concentration

In the ancient Greek, arbitrary (αυθαίρετος, αυτό-αιρετός) means the one who has been elected by himself. In direct de-mocracies arbitrariness, in the ancient Greek sense of the term, has no reason of existence since the power carriers were all the citizens alike. Therefore, the decisions taken by all citizens can-not be arbitrary.

Still, even if we consider the term in its contemporary sense, arbitrariness is obviously minimized when there are many pow-er carriers, each one of them possessing little force, and it is maximized when there is only one power carrier possessing the biggest possible force.

Consequently, the reduction of power concentration re-sults to systematic reduction of arbitrariness.

Corruption and concentration

In direct democracy, the institutions’ distortion which aims at the gratification of the rulers’ interests cannot have a substan-tial meaning since all citizens are rulers and ruled ones at the same time. Such a distortion could actually constitute a modifi-cation and not a kind of corruption of the political regime.

The contrary goes for the political regime of absolute mo-narchy.

Consequently, the reduction of concentration results to the systematic reduction of corruption.

Arrogance and concentration

Arrogance is created when there is a great difference between the power of the citizens and that of the power carriers and functional carriers. If we do not observe such a difference, ar-rogance has no reason of existence and in the case that we do observe it cannot be considered as arrogance but instead as ineffective slowness.

96

In direct democracy this difference is eliminated and as a result arrogance is annihilated or at least minimized.

The contrary goes for absolute monarchy. In that case the dif-ference between the power of the monarch and the one of the citizens is the biggest possible we can observe and that is the reason why the arrogance is maximized.

Consequently, the reduction of power concentration re-sults to the systematic reduction of arrogance.

A Colleague

If I understood well, you claim that the reduction of power con-centration determinedly leads to the improvement of the six out of the eight quality characteristics that you have already men-tioned, namely the transparence, the stability, the acceptance, the arbitrariness, the corruption and the arrogance.

Still, the dominant perception for many centuries suggests that these characteristics are innate and they only be improved through man’s spiritual and psychic culture. Thus, their exis-tence depends on the right choices of the ruled ones and on the culture of the rulers and of those ruled over.

Which of the two is valid?


You understood well. Indeed, I think that the power concentra-tion determinedly shapes the quality characteristics that we examine.

However, I also think that the dominant perception that you mentioned is equally right. The validity of the first does not cancel the validity of the second.

Still, the problem is not which of the two ways of quality’s im-provement is theoretically the right one. The problem is which of the two ways is easier and more effective in practice.

In my opinion the enactment of the proper power concentration is a more practical and easier way than that of culture. Besides,

97

small concentration is deep down inside the insurance of favor-able circumstances as far as the further cultural improvement and the innate quality characteristics’ evolvement are con-cerned.

A Colleague

From our discussion until now we have not yet reached a clear answer to the following crucial question:

Which are the political regimes that possess the best quality?

Those, that are based on the few who bear great spiritual and moral power or those that are based on all citizens who bear normal ones .Those where the power concentration is high or those where it is low?

A Colleague – Introducer

You are absolutely right. Your crucial question has not yet been answered.

Obviously, in order to answer it we need to know the relation that exists between the power concentration and rationality. However, this is the subject of our next discussion.

Therefore, I think that it is better to stop here and to continue our questions to our next discussion.

98

Discussion of 18th April

Subject: The wisdom of Messiah and the stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set


The people who compose the organized set which is called so-ciety do not possess all the same spiritual and moral powers. Some people have very small (vs), others small (s), normal (n), big (b), or very big (vb), spiritual and moral powers.

The fact that people have all these different qualities of pow-ers, the “quality data of distribution”, is known to everybody. However, the “quantity data of distribution” are not very well known. That is, how many people – if we consider them as per-centages of the total- have very small, small, normal etc, spiri-tual or moral power.

The distribution functions18, known also as distribution curves, answer this question.

But what is a distribution curve?

In order to get a simple and tangible answer to the above ques-tion, we will suppose that through using a certain way (e.g. through measuring, through mathematical calculations) we es-timated the number (the quantity) of the people in a society that has the aforementioned five power qualities and that the outcome of that estimation is included in the next table.

18 The distribution functions were developed for the study of problems that arise in the applied sciences (error theory, kinetic theory of gases, etc.). Nowa-days, they are used for the study of political and economic problems.

99

Table 2 “Quality ” versus “quantity” in a social set

Quality (power size)

Quantity (% of total)

Very small (vs)

Small (s)

Normal (n)

Big (b)

Very Big (vb)

5

10

70

10

5

Total 100

The prices of the above table shape the column diagram of schema 9. If, instead of five qualities of powers we set a big number of qualities, then the column diagram becomes a conti-nuous line, like the curve in schema 9. This curve is called dis-tribution curve and its mathematical expression distribution function.

vss

n

bvb

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

vs s n b vb

quality

quan

tity

%

Y

X

vss

n

bvb

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

vs s n b vb

quality

quan

tity

%

Y

X

Schema 9

Column diagram and curve of normal distribution

100

The most logic, and the most probable form of distribution is called normal and it is the one presented in schema 9.

The characteristic traits of a normal distribution are summarized to the following:

• The majority of people (e.g. 70%) possess normal spiritual and moral power.

• A small percentage (e.g. 10%) possesses big power and a same percentage (10%) possesses small ones.

• An even smaller percentage (e.g. 5%) possesses very big power and a same percentage (5%) possesses very small ones.

It should be noted that the percentages (70, 10 and 5%) are indicative but the form and the organization of the curve is ac-tual. The curve always peaks at the normal quality and it is al-ways symmetric to the normal quality.

• The characteristic traits of normal distribution have the validity of a statistical law19. That is they have a very big probability but not a determinist certainty to stand.

• The points of the horizontal axis (coordinates x) express the quality of the powers while the points of the vertical axis (coor-dinates y) express the percentage of the mass that possess the quality we put in question. The coordinate y also expresses the probability of the respective quality to appear in a man out of the total who is chosen in a random way.

19 In modern physics, laws are divided into determinist and statistical. The first ones define an outcome that bears a consequential and absolute certainty and the second an outcome with very high probability. For example, the fundamen-tal law of mechanics F=ma is determinist because it defines with absolute cer-tainty that if in a body of a mass m we apply a force F, the result will be an acceleration a .On the contrary, the law of entropy, namely that any natural alteration leads to an increase of entropy, is statistical because its validity is very probable but it does not bear a consequential and absolute certainty.

101

For instance, within the framework of such a choice, there is a 70% probability to observe the existence of normal power and only a 5% probability to observe the existence of a very big one.

• The above percentages are being determinedly decreased when quality increases (or decreases) in relation to normal quality.

• The quality of the set is expressed by normal quality.20

During our following discussions, we will define the terms “sto-chastic knowledge of citizens” and “wisdom of messiah” and we will attempt to compare them objectively, by virtue of the help provided by the determinism of normal distributions.

The following schema 10 presents a typical curve of normal distribution identical to the one presented in schema 9. The wisdom of messiah corresponds to the point M of the curve, the stochastic knowledge of the citizens’ set to the point N and the wisdom of the organized set to the point G21.

20 Due to the symmetry of the curves, each quality pair with the same differ-ence (bigger-smaller) from the normal price is being reduced through the coun-terbalance to the normal price. 21 The term “wisdom of the organized set” is clarified in the following discus-sions.

102

quality

quan

tity

(pro

babi

lity)

%Y

X

YN

YG

YM

XMXGXn

N

G

M

quality

quan

tity

(pro

babi

lity)

%Y

X

YN

YG

YM

XMXGXn

N

G

M

Schema 10

Quality and quantity data corresponding to the stochastic knowledge of citizens and to the wisdom of messiah

Stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set

According to our previous discussions, the quality of citizens’ set stochastic knowledge is expressed by the normal quality ΧN, which exists in the percentage YN, namely in the majority of the citizens.

The existence probability of normal quality XN, namely the probability to observe the existence of normal quality is YN (e.g. 70%, schema 10) in the case of random choice only one mem-ber of the set. But when all the members of the set participate the quality of the set is XN with a 100% existence probability (certainty).

The wisdom of messiah

In our discussion, the term messiah does not have the sense attributed to it in theology. In our discussion, we consider as messiah any man with spiritual and moral power much bigger than the normal power possessed by the majority of people; any man of genius.

103

Any hint of irony contained in the use of the term does not con-cern the messiah. It refers to the people who, for thousands of years, believe exclusively to the effectiveness of a messiah ig-noring their own stochastic knowledge.

According to the determinism of normal distribution, the wis-dom of messiah possess an exceptionally big quality XM which is always much bigger than the stochastic knowledge of the citi-zens’ set, XN.

Still, the probability to observe the existence of the wisdom of messiah is extremely smaller than the 100% existence probabil-ity of the citizens’ set stochastic knowledge.

The quality and the existence probability of a “messiah” are magnitudes that are being determinedly altered in a reci-procal way. Big quality has small probability and vice versa.

Comparative evaluation

On the condition that the choice of an original messiah is a cer-tain fact, the quality of the wisdom of messiah XM is always much bigger than the stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set XN. (see schema 10).

However, this comparison is misleading because it refers to two different things; to a 100% probable expectation and to a slightly probable expectation.

In order to consider this comparison as an objective one, we have to take in account both quality X, as well as existence probability Y 22.

In any case we consider as a safe conclusion that:

22 The comparison of the product , Quality X Probability , gives us more data because the product XM.ΨΜ in mathematics, expresses the quality that corres-ponds to the 100% probability ΧΜ.(ΨΜ%)=(ΧΜ. ΨΜ).100%. This means that the equivalent to the set’s quality messiah’s one, is not ΧΜ but ΧΜ ΨΜ

104

• The stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set presents an ex-pectancy of normal quality and a very high (≅ 100%) exis-tence probability.

• The wisdom of messiah presents an expectancy of very high quality and a very small existence probability.

The above conclusions have many similarities with those con-cerning the Stock Market. Similarly, the shares that present big profit expectancies have big risk (small existence probability) while the shares that present small expectancy, have small risk (big existence probability).

All the above explain the ancient Greeks trust and preference to decisions based on the logic of the total and of random that is being used in modern physics. For this issue we will have a separate future discussion.

The theory of the Organized Set

In normal distribution’s determinism, the stochastic knowledge of citizens constitutes essentially the algebraic sum of the quali-ties possessed by the “neutral” members. That is, by members, like the molecules of gas, that are lacking, or we consider that they are lacking, in abilities of self-organization.

Still, what happens when the set consists of living creatures, of human beings that possess will and abilities of self-organization?

An answer to this question is given by the theory of the Orga-nized Set (Gestalt) which was developed by German psychiatr-ists and philosophers. According to this theory, the abilities of an organized set G are bigger or equal to the resultant of the abilities possessed by the members that constitute the set.

Consequently, if we represent the quality of an organized set of people with XG, it would be bigger or equal to the resultant quality possessed by the members that constitute the set, namely the XN. However, the existence probability YG is smaller than that of YN (see schema 10). That is

105

XG ≥ XN and

YG ≤ YN

A Colleague

Could you give as an example of a society that acts as an orga-nized set?


Any society whose performances are bigger than the normal in the field of collective – democratic action, can be considered as a case of organized set; as a Gestalt case.

I suppose that the Athenian democracy in the classic years and the community of Ampelakia in the recent years are typical ex-amples.

The inhabitants of the village Ampelakia in Thessaly developed, mainly during the period 1770-1811, an astonishing collective and co-operative activity of producing and trading the famous red threads. These threads were made by the cotton produced in the plain of Thessaly, they were dyed red using natural col-ors found in the area and they were sold not only in Greece and in the other countries of the Ottoman Empire, but also in Aus-tria, in Germany, in France, in England, in Russia, in Italy.

The above activity was an achievement of the “Mutual Fel-lowship of Ampelakia”, that is of a democratic power carrier that was managing all this great effort; a carrier similar to the Ecclesia of Demos.

In our days, such efforts can be supported by technology and by the knowledge of experts who studied in well-known univer-sities. However, the product of these efforts is not as great as the achievement of the “Mutual Fellowship of Ampelakia”; of the simple farmers who lived in Ampelakia village. This fact proves that the superior stochastic knowledge of the organized set is not just a theory but a reality.

Conclusion

From all the above, we come to the conclusion that the com-parison between the wisdom of messiah and the stochastic knowledge of citizens should be done in a very cautious way because in essence, it is a comparison of four and not two magnitudes. It is the comparison of a big expectancy with small probability and of a normal (medium) expectancy with a very high probability (≅ 100%).

The error that people systematically commit is that they ignore the validity of this determinism and they think that they can surpass it just by making successful choices of messiahs. It is the same error committed by the gamblers of the Stock Market. The deterministic relation of expectancy versus probability is known to simple citizens and is being expressed with the say-ing: “who is going to get the many lose the little”

The problem presents some aspects similar to those concerning the function of simple machines where “what we gain in force we loose in the course”, we do not gain energy. A similar prin-ciple goes also here: “what we gain in expectancy we loose in probability”.

In the long run, the wisdom of messiahs and the stochastic knowledge of citizens are equal. They have the same medium price of rationality because even in the total of messiahs there also exist messiahs of all qualities; the big ones and the small ones, the true and the fake.

Nevertheless, people ignore the conclusions drawn by expected qualities and probabilities and they decide upon the exclusive criterion of expectancy. They remember the deeds of the big and true messiahs and they forget the deeds of the small and fake.

A Colleague

Once more I cannot understand.

108

Which should be the basis of political systems? the wisdom of messiah or the stochastic knowledge of citizens?


You have right to insist on the clarification of our subject. Your question constitutes the big dilemma that people face for many thousands of years.

Let us attempt all together to find a reasonable answer to this dilemma.

Let us suppose for a moment that we do not care about flexibil-ity. Which should be the basis of political power systems and why?

A Colleague

I think that you gave us a simple problem. In this case, political systems’ basis should be the stochastic knowledge of citizens because:

• The inherent rationality in the stochastic knowledge of citi-zens‘ set is in the long term equal to the one observed in the wisdom of messiahs,

• Transparency, stability, acceptance, arbitrariness, corrup-tion and arrogance are being improved within the frame-work of the stochastic knowledge of citizens’ set. They are being improved when there is a small power concentration.


Your conclusion is a right and understandable one. Still, this goes for the theoretical conditions. Flexibility is a crucial quality characteristic which cannot be ignored in practice. Problems and people have limited time of existence, they cannot wait.

However, flexibility gets improved in an opposite way from all the other characteristics. It gets improved through the increase of power concentration.

How can it be solved such a problem of optimization?

109

A Colleague

In such cases there is no absolute optimization. Still, there is a relative improvement; Improvement through compromise.


Indeed, we found a logic solution; compromise; the compro-mise whose goal is to ensure the smallest possible pow-er concentration as well as the acceptable flexibility in practice.

The big secret

I have the impression that our discussion led us to the revela-tion of a big secret.

For thousands of years, people trust messiahs because they believe that their wisdom is too bigger than the stochastic knowledge of citizens. Nevertheless, this is not truth; people are forced to trust messiahs in order to ensure an ac-ceptable flexibility in the taking of decisions. That is the big secret.

Popular wisdom is aware of this secret. Therefore, in the well known popular saying “too many cooks spoil the broth”, it is clearly mentioned that the reason why the broth is spoiled is not one cook23, but the existence of too many of them.

Thus, we will compromise in order to ensure the smallest poss-ible concentration, with the provision of the flexibility we need in order to meet our needs.

A Colleague

Is it possible that what you called as a big secret is a verbalism with no practical value since the flexibility of decisions was and

23 In Greece, cook considered as the animal with very little brain. The term “cook brain” man, means not clever man.

110

it still is the most important quality characteristic of political systems?


Your observation stands for the societies, where informing and decisions’ taking through referendums of citizens is forbidden in practice due to the extremely big cost and time. That is the reason why such political systems functioned only in the small states-cities of ancient Greece.

However, nowadays that thanks to technology “world has be-come a village”, nowadays that the “information’s society” is being built, does your observation still stand? I believe that this secret has a big as well as a practical value for the people in information’s society.

This compromise, this crucial choice will be the subject of our next discussion.

A Colleague

What you mentioned as a big secret is a random fact, a false conception of people or another important appeal of the estab-lished power order?


This secret is possibly created by a fallacy or by an appeal made by the established power order. Still, this is not the prob-lem. The problem is to shed light to these secrets; to know the truth.

111

Discussion of 9th May

Subject: The crucial choice


In our previous discussion we came to the conclusion that the improvement of all quality characteristics of a political system is not feasible. However, what is feasible is to choose a system with such a small power concentration that will lead to the creation of significant improvement in transparency, stability, acceptance, arbitrariness, corruption and arrogance while pro-viding an acceptable flexibility.

A Colleague

Your conclusion is reasonable. But how can we actually attain such a power concentration?

In direct democracy, the power concentration is minimized, but flexibility is unacceptably small.

In indirect democracy, the number of representatives cannot be too much increased because that would downgrade flexibili-ty without even providing the certain improvement of the other characteristics.

What is your proposal?


In our discussions, we have accepted that all the power of citizens can be exercised: either by the citizens themselves (di-rect democracy), or by citizens elected by citizens (indirect de-mocracy), or even by “self-elected” men (monarchy, oligarchy). In all these cases of full power assignment, power concentra-tion is expressed by the relation:

ε

=NNC (1)

112

Where: N is the total of citizens and Νe the total of power carri-ers-citizens’ representatives.

However, it is obvious that we can have a political system where citizens exercise directly a percentage K of their total power while the remaining percentage (100 – K), is being as-signed to their representatives in order to be exercised by them. The K power – I wish to be named Klesthenes’ power - would be directly exercised by the citizens’ set through referen-dums24.

In such a case, the concentration C is not given by the relation (1) but instead by the following relation:

100K100

NNC −

⋅=ε

(2)

Where K is the Klesthenes’ power; that is, the part of the total political power which is being exercised through referendums.

The relation (2) leads to the conclusion that concentration C does not only depend on the magnitudes N and Νe but on K too. Consequently, if we increase the price of K we can obtain any price of concentration we want, without changing N nor Νe. It is useful to point out that in indirect democracies, Klesthenes’ power K is essentially zero.

The above way of decreasing concentration is absolutely com-patible with the natural and moral laws, since it is based on the participation of all citizens.

A Colleague

This way is reasonable and understandable, but is not given the impression that its documentation is a bit shallow? These ideas do not seem similar to the ideas concerning the second kind of

24 Klesthenes, politician and low reformer, is the father of Athenian Democracy. Thanks to Klesthenes’ lows, the Ecclesia of Demos was rendered the sovereign and unique power carrier (6th century BC).

113

forever moving25 that we once believed that it was feasible be-cause it abided to the principle of energy conservation and later we discovered that it was determinedly utopist?


Experience has proven that this way of decreasing power con-centration is feasible. It is a way that has been used by women; by our mothers and wives for thousands of years.

Women’s strategy

Women, in order to ensure a small power concentration and an acceptable flexibility, resorted to the following simple and prac-tical choice: They accept the fact that many and small issues are being dealt with big concentration (big flexibility) by them-selves or their husbands, but when it comes to few and big issues, they plant their feet firmly to the ground because these demand a small power concentration. They demand their par-ticipation too.

And they have right. Flexibility is not an important factor in all issues alike. It is more important when taking many and small decisions than when dealing with the few and big ones.

You have possibly heard the typical anecdote: One husband was asked whether he takes the decisions that concern his fam-ily issues by himself or together with his wife, and he ans-wered:

“Some few decisions, like those concerning the family budget and the children’s upbringing, are being taken by both of us. However, the decisions that concern the country’s foreign af-fairs or the policy platform of President Bush, I take them my-self”.

25 As second kind forever moving we consider the machines for which the law of energy conservation is valid but the law of entropy (the second law of thermo-dynamics) is not.

114

This simple way used by women, all politicians, experts and simple citizens alike, ignore it, or they pretend to ignore it. So, it was prevalent the concept that any idea of citizens’ participa-tion in the political power exercising is good and noble but not-applied. Consequently, these ideas are not similar to those concerning the second kind of forever moving. Do you agree with that?

A Colleague

I agree. I have no further questions.


Let us discuss now on the subject of referendums.

You are certainly aware of the fact that citizens participate in the taking of two categories’ decisions. In decisions that con-cern the election of power carriers or functional carriers (Elec-tions) and in decisions about other important issues (Referen-dums).

In indirect democracies, citizens’ decisions have been actually limited to the election of representatives despite the fact that laws provide the taking place of referendums in cases of deci-sions that concern important issues.

If my memory serves me right, during the last seventy years only two decisions have been taken by citizens through refe-rendums. All the other decisions have been taken by citizens’ representatives. They have been taken without the participation of citizens.

This choice, although it ensures a big flexibility in the taking of decisions, it also creates determinist aggravation conditions of all the other six characteristics.

It is possible that this choice could have been justified until re-cently because the direct and indirect cost of a referendum was too big while also the updating of citizens was difficult and one-sided. Still today, in the era of digital technology and in the so-ciety of information, the above arguments do not stand.

115

If we adopt today a strategy similar to the one used by women and if we use technology’s potentials, we can expand democra-cy to the point where the two principles that everybody accepts in theory could also stand in practice. So that: Citizens rule and are being ruled while leaders are deacons and servants of citi-zens’ power.

The above have to take place soon. If not, then we face the risk of democracy’s death.

New technology’s force is very big and for that reason it can also be dangerous if only few and not all citizens use it in the exercise of political power.

A Colleague

At first sight, your views seem reasonable. Still, they contain the following reasonable contradiction: They support the view that the potentials of a small number of people who have been elected on the basis of their higher spiritual and moral powers are equal to the potentials of the citizens’ set which includes people of any category of spiritual and moral powers. Such a claim does not constitute a contradiction and an absurdity?


If the two totals were identical and if they were functioning ac-cording to the same rules, then undoubtedly the potentials of the small total of our representatives would always be bigger than those of the big total of citizens.

But are the two totals identical? Do they both function accord-ing to the same rules? Is it right to compare disparate totals?

A Colleague

I think that the two totals do not function according to the same rules. Our representatives function mostly according to human rules than to natural rules. The contrary goes for the total of citizens.

116


And what is your opinion about the similarities between these two sets?

A Colleague

I think that the two totals are not the same. Deep down they are different because their composition is different.

The composition of our representatives’ total, in percentages of women, workers, farmers, pensioners, is much more different than that of the citizens’ total.


Thus, since the two totals are not the same and since they do not function according to the same rules, then our conclusion that the chosen representatives’ rationality is in long term equal to that of the citizens’ total , is neither contradictory nor absurd. What is absurd indeed, is an outcome drawn out of the compar-ison between two different things.

A Colleague

Earlier, you mentioned that citizens’ representatives and citizens themselves constitute two different totals due to the fact that the percentages representing women’s participation is also dif-ferent.

Still, equality between women and men is determined by nature and not by people.

If this is true, then how is it possible to call the two totals dif-ferent when they are composed by elements that are equal to each other?


The fact that women are equal to men does not imply that they are also the same. Women’s biological, spiritual and psychic characteristics are different then those possessed by men. It is foolish to identify women’s and men’s characteristics and to call

117

this a precondition of equality. Men and women do not consti-tute same entities but supplemental ones.

Inequity between women and men is possibly based on the false conception that in order to consider the two sexes equal they should also be the same. This is possibly due to the fact that only men participated in the exercise of power.

The non-equal participation of women in the rulers’ group does not simply represent an element of differentiation. It is also an “insulting”– according to the ancient Greek sense of the term26 – differentiation.

In ancient Greece they believed that when human beings were first created, they did not look as they do today. Human being was a resultant of man and woman. In that time, human being has four legs that provided an excellent support and a big flex-ibility of movement; four hands for a very big agility, two faces for full control of space and genitals that provided an autonom-ous recreation. Still, this creature possessed the psychic, spiri-tual and biological powers that men and women together have today.

Nevertheless, this creature was considered as a threat to the power of Gods and semi-Gods. It was obvious that, equipped with such abilities, very soon human beings would compete Gods and settled down semi-Gods.

As a result, one day Zeus threw a thunder and separated this all-mighty creature into two, forming man and woman. Conse-quently, first human being’s abilities were divided in two. Half of them went to man and half to woman.

This myth of the division of the first autonomous human being can be found in other people’s tradition, like for example in He-brew’s tradition. As you know, Eve was created by Adams’ ribs.

26 Insult (hybres, Υβρις) in ancient Greek means any action contrary to the natural or moral laws.

118

However, the reasons of the powerful unified human being are not the same in all myths. The true reasons were discovered by ancient Greeks, in the same way they did for so many other big issues.

Many people support that if human beings possessed their first unified form, then things would be much better than they are today. Their aspirations would be wiser, simpler, more effective and wars would be fewer.

Human being’s unification, in his initial form, can possibly hap-pen again in million years. Maybe it will never happen again.

Nevertheless, political power can still be exercised today through the use of the unified human being’s spirit and power. It can take place through the participation of all citizens alike to the exercise of power. Nature cannot be fooled by cunning hu-man laws like those concerning the decree of men’s and wom-en’s percentages in the ballot papers of our candidate repre-sentatives.

A Colleague

It is generally accepted that today, citizens take many false de-cisions despite the fact that these concern a single subject, namely that of their representatives’ election, and that they are not very frequent; they are taken every four years.

It is reasonable to hope that in the future better decisions would be taken although the issues to be faced would be more numerous and more complicated and the frequency of decisions making bigger?

Cannot this be considered as an absurd expectation?


Your question is based on the accepted fact that a decision concerning the choice of the right people is much easier than a decision on a different subject.

119

That can of course be right when it refers to a choice decision of any kind. The taking of such a decision is very easy as far as its procedure is concerned. It is limited to the choice of a ballot paper out of the already existing ones. It seems like the deci-sions that include a pre-choice; like frying pre-fried potatoes.

But when talking for the right choice, then it is a very difficult one that has to be taken after estimating data of controversial validity. After estimating data of “programs”, “candidates’ con-tracts with the people”,” commitments” and “promises”.

With these data reliability, a decision of choice can be consi-dered as a very difficult to face issue, even within the frame-work of a dissertation for a PhD.

For instance, which one of the two decisions you consider as easier?

a. To decide for the exclusive or not vocation of representa-tives and for the reasonable increase of their salary, or

b. To chose the most appropriate representatives that will give best solutions to our citizens’ problems;

I am not aware of your opinion. Still, I know that in contempo-rary democracies the second decision is being considered as a very easy one and that is the reason why it is being taken by the citizens’ set, while the first one is being considered as very difficult one and due to that is being taken by citizens’ repre-sentatives.

As far as it concerns the question related to the difficulties that stem out of frequency’s increase in the taking of decisions no-wadays, I think that this increase will finally become a deci-sions’ improvement factor since citizens will acquire more expe-rience and will be more familiarized with similar activities.

Citizens do not get dizzy when thinking what to decide. They get dizzy when they listen to contradictory views concerning problems where they have no power when it comes to their

120

solution. They get dizzy because they listen to so many things with no reason.

A Colleague

Could you tell us a case where the decision taken upon a citi-zens’ referendum is different and more appropriate than the one taken by the chosen and, by inference, more expert repre-sentatives?


I think that there exist many such cases, which are being deli-berately downgraded or concealed by the established order of representatives.

In my opinion, typical examples of them are the recent referen-dums in Cyprus, in France and in other countries. By these refe-rendums, citizens’ set trivialized the “verbose arsenal” of repre-sentative’s international established order and they thunder out in their face a loud NO, despite the pressure and the threats for their decision’s consequences.

Minorities and citizens’ power

A Colleague

Do you think that it is possible to protect the rights of the mi-norities in a country where big decisions are taken by citizens? You do not worry that these would be formed based solely on majorities’ aspirations and will?


I realize the spirit of your question and your worries. Still, I ho-nestly believe that they can be protected because citizens’ intel-ligence and sensitivity is not smaller than that of their repre-sentatives.

Furthermore, it is understandable that such decisions will not be taken upon a simple majority, but instead on the grounds of

121

a reasonably increased majority of the citizens. The same goes for other crucial decisions.

In my opinion, these worries are being intentionally magnified because they contribute to the support and to the sustenance of contemporary power systems; because they contribute to the sustenance of the conception that “although people are the rulers, still they should not rule”.

Democracy and decentralization

A Colleague

It is easy to understand that citizens’ participation to exercise political power results to a decrease of power concentration and to whatever this entails.

Still, it is not possible when we use decentralization to get the same outcome we have through participation?


Let us first define the meaning of decentralization.

The power of a country is being exercised to a large extent in the national level where laws and policies are being decided. Nevertheless, a power’s percentage is being exercised by the prefectural and municipal power carriers.

Consequently, we do not observe problems of power concentra-tion only in the central power carriers but also on the regional ones.

The existing prefectural or municipal power can be concen-trated to one or many citizens.

The related power concentration27 of regional carriers can get very high values; values equal or bigger than those of the

27 The related power concentration refers to the responsibilities of the regional power carriers.

122

central power carriers. There exist cases where mayor’s arrog-ance is bigger than that of the prime minister.

There is only one way to decrease concentration and to im-prove power quality characteristics; citizens’ participation in the taking of prefectural and municipal big decisions.

However, this participation today is non-existent in institutions and in practice as well.

Nowadays, there is no “Ecclesia” functioning anywhere; neither in state, nor in state’s regions or even in regions’ municipalities.

And we can maybe accept this fact as far as states are con-cerned; But what about the municipalities that have fewer citi-zens? The municipalities28 that democracy owes its name? Even within their framework citizens’ participation in power’s exercise should be zero?

Nowadays, we have completely forgotten that municipality meant the total of citizens who had the right to participate in the taking of decisions. By virtue of that reason, municipality’s name was defined according to citizens’ names and not to that of the city. They used to say Municipality of Athenians and not of Athens like we use to do today.

Maybe this change in the name constitutes an element of mod-ernization in order to interpret the existing reality. Today, citi-zens participate in the exercise of the municipality power to the same extent that buildings and trees do.

Decentralization can only increase flexibility. It cannot improve power’s quality because it does not reduce power concentra-tion. Quality improvement can be achieved only through partic-ipation.

28 Municipality in Greek is Demos (Δήμος).

123

Democracy and trade unionism

A Colleague

Many people believe that the pillars and the seedbeds of de-mocracy’s growth are the “organs” of collective action; the as-sociation, the co-operative, the union, the confederation, the general confederation.

Still, we have not mentioned this matter in our discussions. Why? What is your opinion?


My opinion is that every organ of collective action constitutes a pillar of democracy and a seedbed for the growth of democratic conceptions and practices, by one inviolable condition:

The organ’s action should be democratic. But this realized when all members of the organ participate in the taking of major decisions and not when representatives of them participate.

If such participation does not exist and things happen in the same way that decisions are being taken today in the state, in regions and in municipalities, then they cannot be considered neither as democracy’s pillars nor as seedbeds of democratic conceptions and practices. Instead of that they are the pillars and the seedbeds of the central power’s model, where citizens are limited to their representatives’ choice and what is more, through the system of pre- selection, which is not made by citi-zens but instead by other power centers.

Democracy and opinion polls

A Colleague

In my opinion, citizens nowadays participate in the taking of decisions. Only that this participation is indirect and not direct.

This results from the current interest and frequency of opinion polls.

124

You do not agree that the latter also represent a form of indi-rect citizens’ power?


Indeed, I do not agree. On the contrary, I think that they are one more appeal of citizens’ power. Opinion polls constitute a method of collecting and analyzing data for the purpose of forecast and estimation people’s opinions. They are a tool of forecast like the simulation or the development and use ma-thematic models.

However, this tool is not being used for the exercise of power by citizens. It is being used for the exercise of power by citi-zens’ representatives; by the established order in general

This is the result we get when reckoning the time and the way used by opinion polls and more specifically by those who order their carrying out and typically pay the related cost.

Still, deep down inside, the cost is being paid by citizens and what is more, this happens not on the grounds of the latter’s acquisition of information, but instead for their manipulation; for the promotion of the present or future power carriers’ inter-ests.

Power’s exercise by citizens, does not take place through opi-nion polls. It can take place only through referendums that constitute an institutionalized way of decisions’ taking.

Such referendums today, thanks to technology, can be carried out in a fast and reliable way that also has low cost.

If Reality Shows’ producers can carry out such “referendums” for meaningless matters, then certainly, the state also is able to carry them out for the major issues that concern its citizens.

My colleague, opinion polls have no relation at all with citizens’ power. Only the way through which power carriers comment on the favorable or unfavorable for them results, is enough to prove their purpose and reliability.

PART II

The intentional distortion of Democracy’s sense

• The researchers of ancient Greek Democracy had to face at the same time the reactions generated in the ranks of the established power order as well as the difficulties concern-ing the consolidation of such a concept; the difficulties concerning the understanding of a political system for which there was no previous experience or knowledge about it.

• The problems that they had to deal with were very much alike to those faced by Galileo when he attempted to refute the geocentric conception as well as to those which aimed to refute the conception that the earth is flat.

• The aforementioned researchers had never truly believed in the spirit of ancient Greek Democracy; in the citizens’ state. They always believed that citizens and state are two different things.

Discussion of 23rd May

Subject: Established conception phenomena


It is a certain fact that all our discussions until now created the following question: Is it possible that, for so many years, so many people – experts, politicians and simple people – commit the same mistake? Namely, to believe that the best feasible way of exercising power is to choose capable and moral leaders to whom we will transfer all our power to be exercised by them? To believe that the possibility of being exercised by citi-zens themselves the political power, is just a noble but none-theless utopist goal?

Certainly, one more problem arose: As far as those who exer-cise power and the recipients of it, everything is ok. They surely have reasons to support the aforementioned view; But what about all the others? Philosophers, sociologists, political scien-tists, intellectuals, simple citizens behave in the same way? Why they do not practically and ideologically support citizens’ participation in the exercise of power? Why an elderly commun-ist who fought for all his life in order to create a brighter future for the generations to come, who had never won one penny by betraying his ideals – like so many others did – told me one day:

“All this is fine, we also wanted it but it can never be fulfilled”

I suppose that something else is happening; something which is more powerful and more effective than the aspirations of those who exercise power.

We observe that in the history of natural sciences there exist some phenomena very much alike to the established current conception regarding the way power should be exercised.

These phenomena are called phenomena of the established, dominant, sovereign conception.

128

The basic characteristic of these phenomena is that they are attributed an “obvious truth” and that is the reason why any doubting concerning them is simply regarded as absurd or pic-turesque.

Based on that fact, we will all together see if the way through which people perceive democracy today, constitutes “an estab-lished conception phenomenon”.

In order to proceed to this attempt, it seemed useful to present three examples of undoubted established conception, to under-stand the causes of them and to finally come to a conclusion: If the way we perceive democracy constitutes a phenomenon formed by the established conception.

Our examples were drawn out of the field of natural sciences where the existence of the phenomena is absolutely obvious and undoubted.

Such examples can also been drawn out of the fields of all sciences; philosophy, medical science and sociology.

The established conception of the flat earth

In older times, people used to believe that the earth was flat like a pan with a pie, having a top and a bottom side. All people, human beings, animals, plants, existed on the top side. At the bottom side there was nothing in the same way that there is nothing at the bottom side of the pan.

This view was supported for thousand years, despite the fact that some people doubted it and started claiming that the earth is spherical.

This established conception is of course demolished, it is va-nished. Nowadays there is no single human being who believes that the earth is flat. Still, in the past, this view was supported by everybody for thousands of years; experts and simple citi-zens alike.

Today we understand the reasons that created and preserved this conception. It was the knowledge and the supervi-

129

sion of little earth areas where the vertical directions are practically the same. That is to areas of a relatively small ex-tent, in a village, in a town, the direction of the vertical is the same in any given point. This experience, which is proved to be correct under the condition of the small extent of the areas, took a more general form. People believed that the vertical di-rection is the same in all given points on the earth. That it was stable all over the world.

Still, the conclusion of the stable vertical was absolutely com-patible with the conception of the flat earth. In a flat earth the vertical is everywhere the same as it is shown in schema 11.

EARTH

Κ Κ Κ Κ

EARTH

Κ Κ Κ Κ

Schema 11

In flat earth the vertical K has everywhere the same direction

However, the experience of the stable vertical is incompatible with the notion of spherical earth because its direction on the upper hemisphere is opposite to the one of the bottom hemis-phere, as it is shown in schema 12.

130

Κ

ΚΚΚ

ΓΗ

Κ ΚΚ

ΚΚΚ

EARTH

Κ ΚΚ

ΚΚΚ

ΓΗ

Κ ΚΚ

ΚΚΚ

EARTH

Κ Κ

Schema 12

In spherical earth the vertical of the bottom hemisphere will have an opposite direction to the one of the upper hemisphere.

Nonetheless, people had the experience that the vertical direc-tion starts from head to toe and that objects were falling down accordingly.

That was the reason why they claimed that it was not possible that the earth was spherical because in that case:

1. People of the bottom hemisphere should have been walking upside down with their feet facing the sky and their heads to-wards the earth.

2. People, animals and objects of the bottom hemisphere had the risk of falling into space, as it is shown in schema 13.

131

Schema 13

If earth was spherical people of the bottom hemisphere would be falling into space

The above conclusions-arguments for flat earth nowadays seem laughable and make people at least to smile. Still, these argu-ments preserved the conception of flat earth for thousands of years.

If you think thoroughly about these arguments, you would see that they were not completely mistaken. In essence, they in-cluded only one mistake; that the vertical was stable. Every-thing else was fairly reasonable and could stand in the case of a stable vertical.

Nowadays that we are in a position that allows us to supervise big areas on the earth, that we travel all around the world, we know that the vertical is not stable but it is different in any giv-en point on the earth. Its direction coincides with the straight line that relates the given point to the center of the earth. It coincides with the earth radius as it is shown in schema 14.

132

EARTH

KK

KK

K

K

EARTH

KK

KK

K

K

Schema 14

The vertical in spherical earth coincides with the earth radius

According to your opinion, what was the reason that led to the creation of the established perception that the earth is flat?

A Colleague

I believe that it was due to insufficient experience. People did not have the possibility to understand that the vertical direction is different in every given point on the earth. On the contrary, they were finding out that it was the same in approximate points.


Is there any other reason?

A Colleague

I think that a second reason was the established intellectual order that supported the conception of the flat earth by using the laughable arguments that you mentioned. Certainly, these arguments nowadays seem laughable. Still, during that time they seemed wise and that is why they were proved to be ef-fective.

133


I agree with you. I just want to add that the established intel-lectual order had nothing to gain from supporting the concep-tion of the flat earth. It just did not have the possibility to see the truth.

Our final conclusion is that the established conception of flat earth was created by the limited experience of people and by the mistaken still not purposeful opinions expressed by the es-tablished intellectual order.

The established conception of the geocentric system


Since ancient times until the 17th century, people believed in the geocentric system of the planets. That is, they believed that the center of the planetary system was earth, considered as the most important in every way planet. On an orbit around the earth, they were moving the sun, the moon and all the other planets.

The reasons that led to this conception were:

a. The Everyday experience People were seeing everyday the rising, the climax and the fall-ing of the sun, the moon and of all the other stars. They were seeing them as moving all around a motionless earth.

b. The scientific established order Based on the above experience, the Greek astronomers Apollo-nios and Ipparchos developed a model of laws prevailing on the motion of all planets around the earth. This model was com-pleted and improved by the also Greek astronomer Claudius Ptolemeus (100-168 AC. approximately) who was born and lived in Egypt.

134

In Ptolemeus’ model29, there were many and detailed data con-cerning the planetary motion and it could be used in order to make forecasts about the most important happenings of the planetary motion such as the eclipses and the planetary “syn-ods” (meetings). These possibilities given by the model ob-viously constituted an indirect proof of the validity of the geo-centric system.

c. The theological - political established order According to the Old Testament, earth was the first interesting creation of God. After the earth, there were created the sun, the moon and the stars. The mission of all of them was to serve earth’s needs.

These claims were sacred and they were accepted with closed eyes by the theological and political established order of those times.

Under the aforementioned empirical, scientific, theological and political circumstances, the geocentric system became the most characteristic and the strongest phenomenon of the established conception. Any attempt to subvert this concept was not only considered as an absurdity contrary to this experience, it was not only an act contrary to Ptolemeus’ opinions that supported reliable forecasting, but it was also considered as an act of blasphemy against God. It was a heretic act that was being pu-nished by “death in fire”.

The subversion of the geocentric model started with the works of Copernicus (1473-1543).

Copernicus studied theology and at the same time mathematics and astronomy. Very early he started studying carefully the work of Ptolemeus and became an admirer of him. Nonethe-less, very soon Copernicus reached to the conclusion that Pto-

29 It is included in Ptolemeus’ book “Megisti” which was burned in the fire in Alexandria’s library. It reached us nowadays through its translation in Arabic.

135

lemeus in order to explain all phenomena concerning the pla-nets – like the retrogressive movements of planets – he was forced to develop a very complicated model (circular motion in small circles, in over-cycles). By examining all the given data he understood that all these could be explained in a very simple way if the center of the planetary system was the sun and not the earth. Thus, he developed a model different than that of Ptolemeus which was considering the sun as the center.

By using Copernicus’ model, the same forecasting as those of Ptolemeus could be done, but their accuracy was smaller than the one presented in the geocentric model.

These first predicaments did not unsettle Copernicus view as far as the validity of his opinions was concerned. Copernicus was unsettled by the reactions of the theological established order which he was already expecting. Copernicus himself was a theologian and he could understand.

That was the reason why it took him a long time to publish these opinions of his. He published them in 1543 when he was already seventy years old and he had little life ahead of him. Copernicus died in 1543. The geocentric system was not sub-verted straight after the publication of Copernicus’ work. Many attempts were made with most important the one of Galileo.

Galileo (1564-1642) studied at the beginning to be a doctor. But he was mainly involved in the study of mathematics, as-tronomy and in the construction of some machines. Despite the fact that he is not the inventor of the telescope, he is the first to use it in order to make astronomical observations.

With the help of the telescope, Galileo gathered many data through which he substantiated Copernicus’ views on the sun-centric system.

Galileo was also aware of the risks that he could face if he was about to publish the above data. Due to that fact he did not rush to publish them.

136

A little later, Cardinal Barberini, a friend of his and a man with broad education and an open-mind, became Pope. Galileo con-sidered this time to be the most appropriate to publish his views.

But when he published his book, the theological established system commanded its confiscation and sent Galileo to the Holy Inquisition.

Galileo was not burned in fire. His friend, the Pope, and the Holy Inquisition showed “understanding and a big heart” since they put him first to confess that he is guilty and to sign a text with which he was renouncing his views. That way, his punish-ment was small. He was not burned in fire but he was obliged to live the rest of his life in his house.

The established conception of the geocentric system was al-tered very slowly. Nowadays everybody accepts and believes the sun-centric system.

According to your opinion, which were the reasons that led to the creation of the established conception of the geocentric system?

A Colleague

Here things are clearer. It was for the same reasons that you have already mentioned: the limited and mistaken experience of the people, the non purposeful mistaken views of the intel-lectual established order and the mistaken positions of the theological and political established order which were purposed and intentioned. Obviously, the latter reckoned that the subver-sion of the geocentric system would undermine their authority and their power.

The established conception of the stable time


The notion of time is difficult to be defined in a direct way. Usually is being defined indirectly through the purposes for which we use time. Such purposes are the definition of the be-

137

ginning, of the end, of the coherence and of the duration of phenomena and events.

Despite the difficult notion of time, people are very familiar with it. They use it constantly in every activity of them.

This familiarization and the established experience led to the conclusion that time is a stable magnitude all over the earth. This stability of time which is absolutely compatible to our ex-perience, took a more general form. Time was considered to be stable in every point of universe. Nonetheless, this is neither compatible nor incompatible to our experience because simply there is no such experience.

The case of the stable time presents many similarities with the case of the stable vertical. Both are not valid in general but in practice have a very limited validity. Stable time stands for a very small part of the universe e.g. the earth and the stable vertical stands for a very small area of earth e.g. a field.

The validity of stable time was not only accepted by simple people but also by experts of all times alike. It was also ac-cepted by Newton, the father of all contemporary Natural Sciences.

Newton created a very big structure. He introduced mathemat-ics in the studying of physical phenomena, he developed the new mathematical tools of differential calculus, he discovered the Fundamental law of Mechanics and the law of Universal Gravitation.

In the mathematical study of the phenomena which were intro-duced by Newton, their future situation appears as a function of space (variables x, ψ, z) and of time (variable t). The form of this function is nothing more than the mathematical expression of the law that stands for the phenomenon to be studied.

A basic condition of the Newtonian Mechanics that stands also for the planets was the stability of time.

138

If time was not stable then the structure created by Newton and by other great scientists seemed to be unsettled.

In 26 September 1905, a young and unknown physicist, Albert Einstein published an article through which he was supporting that time is not stable but it depends on the motional situation of the object (of the system) that becomes the phenomenon and of the system where the observer is situated.

This view, known as the Special Theory of Relativity, consti-tuted an overturning of the view of the stable time; a view, which was adopted by Newton and by all the great scientists of that time.

Today we know that the relativity of time was the outcome of a mathematical study by two other great scientists: Lorenz and Poincaré. But none of the two did believe in the value and the reliability of the mathematical outcomes because they were op-posite to Newton’s views.

For that reasons some historians of the science today, are fac-ing problems when asked to estimate who discovered in effect the theory of relativity; Lorenz, Poincaré or Einstein?

We undoubtedly believe that it was discovered by Einstein who found the spiritual and mental courage to clash with Newton and all the scientific established order of his time; to clash and to overturn the conception of stable time.

The overturning of the established conception happened slowly. It took place through fruitful confrontations through which it was made clear that under specific conditions time is stable in the same way that under specific conditions the vertical is also stable. Thus, became understood that Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity was not canceling the Newtonian Mechanics but it was completing it.

According to your opinion, which were the reasons that led to the creation of the established conception that time is stable?

139

A Colleague

Again in this case, the reason was the non-purposed mistaken views of the intellectual established order. The great authority and the great power of the established order was creating very big inhibitions and predicaments when it was about to publish and to estimate objectively views that were contrary to the ones expressed by the intellectual established order.

A second reason was the limited experience –actually the abso-lute lack of experience- since the relative time was being dis-covered through the brain and not through observations.


Summing up the outcomes of our conversation we come to the conclusion that in all three examples one of the most important causes that led to the creation of the established conception was the power and the actions of some established order; of the spiritual one, the religious or the political.

Between the established order and the established conception there seems to be a very strong relation; a relation equal to the one with the chicken and the egg. And at this point we are not in a position to know if the established order gave birth to the established conception or the established conception gave birth to the established order.

A Colleague

About the subject of time’s relativity you mentioned some his-torical but not essential data. Thus, we were not able to form a personal opinion and our opinion is by necessity a dogmatic one.

Could you tell us a few things about the essence of relativity’s theory?

Something like that will not only be interesting but it will also be very useful so as to form an opinion of our own.

140


Your request is right. Still, it is difficult to be satisfied in general and more specifically by me. Nonetheless, it could be satisfied by a colleague that is here between us. This colleague of ours knows more than I do and I believe he could give a brief and simple answer.

But before he starts talking to us about the basic points of the relativity theory, we should reach to a conclusion about the case of democracy.

The established conception of today’s democracies

Do you think that the fact that the majority of people believes that the exercise of power by the citizens themselves is utopian and that the only feasible way is to choose competent and moral representatives, constitutes a phenomenon of established conception?

A Colleague

Ancient Greek democracy was based on two principles; a logic principle and a procedural one.

The logic principle demands that the major decisions have to be made by the whole lot of the citizens; by the true citizens’ set.

The procedural principle clarifies that the above mentioned de-cisions have to be based on the will of citizens’ majority. (Ma-jority principle).

In ancient Greek democracies and especially in Athenian de-mocracy, both principles were valid. In some others political systems, the procedural principle was valid, but the logic one was not.

In these political systems, decisions were made by the demo-cratic procedure of majority’s principle that was enforced to a petty subset of citizens and not to the true citizens’ set. This petty but “power subset” was formed by wise men (old men), or by rich men, or by distinguished family men.

141

Such regimes were the political systems of Sparta30, of Car-thage, of Venice, of Rome. Thousands years later, in modern democracies, the above “power subsets” changed face. Now they are formed by citizens’ representatives.

Still, in modern democracies, the essential figure has not change; the procedural principle of democracy is valid but the logic one is not.

Today the majority of people believe that democracy is the re-gime where the “principle of Majority” is enforced, independent-ly if this principle is enforced on the true citizens’ set or on a petty and power subset of it.

This view constitutes a clear established conception phenome-non, since the democratic logic is not enforced.


I agree with you. Your view is clear and strong. Is there anoth-er point of view?

A Colleague

I think it does.

This is resulted from the arguments that were used in support of the conception that political power exercise by the citizens’ set is a utopia. These arguments are in essence alike to the aforementioned laughable ones in support of flat earth concep-tion. These similarities are sending a clear answer to our ques-tion.

I am sure that one day people will understand and will believe that political systems are by nature citizens’ set-centric ones, as the planetary system is by nature a sun-centric one.

30 In Sparta the power subset named Apella and was formed from “wise men” and not from rich or distinguish family men. In those times Sparta’s regime was not named democracy. Today is named limited democracy of Apella.

142

The “Lightgiver Sun”, of a political system is the total of citi-zens; it is not one or few citizens with the capacities of a lead-er-messiah.


I agree with you.

Is there another point of view?

A Colleague

I also think that this phenomenon existence is obvious.

When we accept the existence of established conception’s phe-nomena about the flat earth and the stable time, which are not connected to financial interests on behalf of the ruling class, what should we accept when we claim that the only feasible way of exercising power is that of our chosen representatives?

What should we accept when it is known that by virtue of that conception some of our messiahs–representatives made money, stock shares, villas in aristocracy’s suburbs and they live in the luxury of the sovereigns?

If we investigate it more, I think that we devalue our intellect.

I believe that this conception is an organized intentional crea-tion of the few who exercise power and their protégés; if not of all of them, at least of the majority of them.


Still, we have to admit that this phenomenon of the established conception is less intense than similar phenomena in the past.

In those days, people with views contrary to the established ones were being sent to fire. Nowadays, they can all express freely their views, like we do today.

143

A Colleague

Indeed, there are differences. However, these differences do not constitute a change of the goals but only a change of the means and the methods that lead to their accomplishment.

Then, the established order was using the fire. Nowadays, it uses other means more modern, more effective and with lower cost for the established order.

Today, instead of the fire there is the methodical scorn and ig-norance of such ideas and the systematic admiration and pro-motion of the contrary ideas. These stand accordingly for the people who carry these ideas.


Is there another opinion?

A Colleague

The space and the time of discovering ancient Greek democra-cy, I think that it constitutes also a cause of creation of an es-tablished conception phenomenon.

The democracy that was born in ancient Greece and climaxed in Athens died suddenly in 322 BC not due to its weaknesses but through an external intervention.31

After the death of the Athenian democracy, the political regimes of all the countries were monarchies or oligarchies. Elements of democracy existed in the regimes of some states, were of non importance in comparison to the ones of the Athenian Democ-racy.

The democracy of the ancient Greek world, as an idea and as an act, fell in deep come for 2000 years.

31 In 322 BC , Athenians were won by Macedonians. The Macedonian general Antipatros, forced Athenians to cut out the democratic regime and to accept an oligarchic one.

144

It was actually in the 18th century that started the attempt to rediscover and to approach for once more the ideas of democ-racy, of ancient Greek world in general, by British humanists, philosophers and writers. It happened in a space and time where monarchies and oligarchies were at the peak of their power and of their moral authority.

Those who first started to study the ancient Greek world they admired its artistic and philosophical achievements. Nonethe-less, as it was natural, they were looking in doubt, concerned and scared the way that political power was being exercised in that world. They were skeptical and scared about democracy.

The researchers of ancient Greek democracy had at the same time to face the reactions of the political established order as well as the difficulties concerning the consolidation of such a concept; the difficulties in understanding a political regime that was not supported by previous experience and knowledge.

They had to face problems similar to those concerning the ra-tionale of the flat earth and to those that Galileo saw rising when he attempted to support the soundness of the sun-centric system.

I think that these were the reasons why researchers were par-ticularly and systematically underlining the disadvantages and the risks that are inherent in the political regime of democracy and they were not missing out its advantages. In essence they never adopted the principle of democracy; the principle of citi-zens’ power. Instead of it they adopted the need to limit the power of the state leaders in favor of that of the citizens. And this constitutes the most essential achievement of contempo-rary indirect democracies.

I think that contemporary indirect democracies were since their birth a phenomenon of established conception.

But this is the least to mention. Today all political regimes are called democracies. They are being called democracies even those political regimes where the citizens do not choose those

145

who govern them and they do not either have the ability to ex-press their views. But democracy means the power of citi-zens.


Your views are interesting and reasonable. It will worth the trouble to consider them as a reason to start a more detailed study of which the basic points you could present to us in a future discussion.

Is there another view?

A Colleague

There is not.


Now I think we should kindly ask our colleague to tell us a few words for the theory of time’s relativity.

A sketch of the relativity theory


The special theory of relativity is not only one of the greatest discoveries of the 20th century and it is also one of the biggest intellectual revolutions of man.

Einstein with this theory ignored all Newton’s conceptions as well as those of all the top scientists and he went on to two very important breakthroughs.

1. He defined the notion of time in a simple and understanda-ble way transcending complicated and profound definitions that they exist on the same subject.

2. He proved that time with the meaning that himself defined could not be stable but relatively stable. He proved that time was being changed according to the “motion state” of the system where the events take place and the motion state of system were studied by the observer is situated.

146

The meaning of time

Einstein in his historic article that was first published in German in the 26th of September of 1905, he writes the following con-cerning the meaning of time.

“If we would like to describe the motion of a material point, then we express the prices of the co-ordinates (x, y, z) as func-tions of time. Here we have to hold carefully in our heads that a mathematical description of this kind has no natural impor-tance, unless we have made absolutely clear what we mean with the meaning “time”. We have the obligation to consider that all our findings in which time plays an important part, they are always judgments that concern simultaneous facts. If, for example, I say that “this train arrives here at 7 o’clock” , I roughly mean the following: “The indication 7 of the small hand of my watch and the arrival of the train are simultaneous facts”.

It could seem possible to overcome all difficulties that follow the meaning of “time” if we substitute the word “time” with the expression “the indication of the small hand of my watch”. And indeed, such a definition is satisfying when we are interested in defining some time exclusively for the place where our watch is, but it seizes to be satisfying when we have to interrelate time wise a series of events that happen in different places or –practically the same- to estimate the time that events happen in places situated far from the watch”.

That is, according to Einstein, time is a comparison, an estima-tion of the simultaneous character of the event we study with another one which is being used as a point of reference; for example, the hands of our watch.

The relativity of time

Under the rationale of the above definition of time, the follow-ing questions arise: These estimations of simultaneity are abso-lutely independent? Is it possible that they have a deterministic dependence on some natural magnitudes? Is it possible two phenomena that have been estimated to be simultaneous by an

147

observer A, to be estimated in a deterministic certainty as non simultaneous by an observer B when there are some specific differences?

The special theory of relativity gave answers to these ques-tions. It defined when and why the estimation of simultaneity changes. It defined when and why time is relative.

These answers could be summarized as following: The estima-tions of simultaneity depend on the motion state of the systems where the events take place and on the motion state of the system where the observer is situated. The cause of this de-terminism is the finite speed of transmitting the data that will be used for the estimation of simultaneity. That is, these data are not being transmitted with infinite speed, instantaneously, but with the speed of light (300.000 Km/sec); a speed, which is stable in the universe.

But let us clarify the above through an experiment of intellect, through a reckoning into which we use mathematics and mean-ings very simple, like those used in high school.

The imaginary train of Einstein32

Let us assume that there is a train of 5.400.00km length which has the usual wagons and which is moving with a stable speed of 240.000km/sec as it is shown in schema 15.

Such a train of course exists only in our minds but this is no harm for our reckoning.

32 This reckoning can be found in the book “What is the Theory of Relativity” of the Russian physicist L. Landaou, who was awarded with Nobel prize (Korotzi publications, 1983).

148

2.700.000 Km 2.700.000 Km

240.000 Km/s

stationmaster

2.700.000 Km 2.700.000 Km

240.000 Km/s

passenger

2.700.000 Km 2.700.000 Km

240.000 Km/s

stationmaster

2.700.000 Km 2.700.000 Km

240.000 Km/s

passenger

Schema 15

The imaginary train of Einstein

Let us also assume that in the middle of the train there is a light that when it is on activates two photocells that exist in the first and in the last wagon and through which their doors are being opened.

When the train passes from a station and at the moment it is situated in front of the stationmaster it is lighted up. After a while the doors of the first and of the last wagon are going to open.

We are asked to estimate what would a passenger in the mid-dle of the train and the stationmaster see?

a. What the passenger sees The light in order to reach from the middle of the train to the first and to the last wagon will use equal times33 which can be estimated by the relation:

33 The velocity of light is stable and independent from the fact if the system is moving towards the same or towards the opposite direction of the light (expe-rimental findings of Michelson)

149

Dis tan ce 2.700.000t 9secVelocity 300.000

= = =

So the passenger will “see” that the doors of the first and of the last wagon open simultaneously and after 9sec of the electric lamp lighting up.

b. What the stationmaster sees As it is shown in schema 15, the last wagon approaches the stationmaster with a speed of 240.000km/sec while the first wagon is drawn away with the same speed.

Consequently, for the stationmaster the relative speed of light towards the last wagon is equal to the sum of the speeds of the light and of the train. As an outcome, the time of the light’s arrival to the last wagon and of the opening of the doors is:

sec5000.240000.300

000.700.2t =+

=τ

In a similar way, the relative speed with which the light is mov-ing towards the first wagon is equal to the speed difference of light and train. As a result, the time of the light’s arrival to the first wagon and of the opening of the doors will be:

sec45000.240000.300

000.700.2t =−

=π

Consequently, the stationmaster will “see” that the doors of the first and of the last wagon will not open simultaneously as the passenger saw but with a time difference of 40sec (45-5=40sec)

Through this example we can draw the result that the same events –the opening of the doors in the first and in the last wa-gon- were simultaneous for the passenger of the train but they were not simultaneous for the stationmaster who was out of the train.

150

This difference was created because the relative speed of the passenger as far as the first and the last wagon are concerned was zero, while for the stationmaster was 240.000km/sec; pos-itive for the last wagon and negative for the first.

I hope that my brief introduction on that serious subject would enable you to clear –and not to confuse even more- your views concerning the theory of relativity.

151

Discussion of 1st June

Subject: Intelligence of the citizens and political systems


It is obvious that there is a strong relation between the intelli-gence of the citizens and the political systems. It is also obvious that in order to understand this relation we are supposed to be aware of some basic elements – of the alphabet – of political systems as well as of intelligence.

We have already discussed for the basic elements of the politi-cal systems. Let us attempt something similar about the intelli-gence of the man.

What intelligence is?

“Intelligence is the ability to receive and to cerebrally process the data, the information”

That is, intelligence is the ability of man to realize two specific functions:

(1) To receive the information existing in the environment through the help of his sense organs.

(2) To process this information through his cerebral power and not through instincts and motivations

Animals receive information but they process it through in-stincts and motivations; they don’t process it through cerebral power.

Two very important conclusions are resulted by the above clas-sic definition:

• There is no intelligence without the existence of informa-tion

152

• Intelligence does not exist only when information is being received since the existence of them does not imply their cerebral process.

We think that this second conclusion should be understood and experienced by the people of “information society” because there is the risk that there would be prevail the view and mainly the practice, that intelligence is only the receiving of informa-tion. It is obvious that such a practice would lead to a deprecia-tion of people’s intelligence.

Types of intelligence: IQ and EQ

In the previous classic definition of intelligence, it is being indi-rectly defined by its results and not directly by its nature and function.

This happens because deep down we do not know –or at least we did not know- many things about them.

Our knowledge about intelligence was general and philosophical for thousands of years. Since the beginning of the 20th century, neurologists, psychiatrists, psychologists, biologists and many other scientists start to investigate about the nature and the function of intelligence. They started to investigate the HOW and by WHICH elements of the brain human intelligence is be-ing created.

These efforts gave the first answers to the questions HOW and by WHICH that led to the development of measuring methods of the power of each man’s intelligence.

The first decades of the 20th century, the power of intelligence was expressed by the quotient of the right answers to a total of specialized questions that were being asked to the man whose intelligence we wanted to measure.

The results of such measuring of people’s intelligence power, took the name IQ ; Intelligence Quotient .

For example, if the questions that were made are 20 and a man answers correctly to 16 of them, then his IQ is 16/20.

153

From the beginning of the 20th century until the midst of the 1990’s we believed in one HOW and one by WHICH. That is, we believed that people had only one type of intelligence that was simply called intelligence and it was expressed with the letters IQ that include information about its power.

The products of IQ are speculations and thoughts that follow the model of the ancient Greeks’ logic: “if a then b” and the model of mathematical logic: “2+2=4”.

People call the above type of thinking as logic thinking while the neurologists called it serial by observing the form of the “neurons” through which is being created.

In the midst of the 1990’s researchers found out that human beings have also a second type of intelligence, apart from IQ.

The new type of intelligence was called Emotional intelligence and compendiously EQ that expresses the type and the power of intelligence.

The products of EQ are speculations and thoughts that are called coherent.

The coherent thoughts differ by the logical thoughts as far as the cerebral elements that are being produced are concerned as well as the procedure of this production.

The coherent thoughts are being constructed by the correlation of the information with the sentiments that they provoke. An example of coherent thought is the conclusion of the existence of risk when a dog is barking.

Coherent thoughts constitute the ring that unites sentiments with outer facts, with information.

Intelligence and civilization models

There is a strong correlation between the two fundamental models of civilization and the types of intelligence that can be summarized as follows:

154

IQ is the intelligence on which it was based the ancient Greek and the western civilization.

EQ is the intelligence on which it was based the civiliza-tion of the Eastern people.

The scientists that until now ignored the above mentioned data of EQ, they were considering that any non logic thought and consequently the coherent thoughts as absurdities and occult-ism. That is why coherent thoughts in the West were being faced with reservation if not with disdain. Today, after the dis-covery of EQ, they are being faced with understanding and re-spect.

The first years of the 21st century (2000-2002) scientists dis-covered that man has a third type of intelligence that was called spiritual intelligence or compendiously SQ.

SQ is the sovereign intelligence of man that correlates and con-trols the coherent and logic speculations through creating ques-tions and answers for sovereign issues like: which is the mean-ing of life? Why we were born?

Obviously, the total intelligence of man is the sum of the emo-tional , logic and spiritual intelligence, that is:

Man’s intelligence= EQ+IQ+SQ

This relation has only logic use. In order that it would also have mathematical use then EQ, IQ and SQ it had to present the same measuring units (e.g. Watt).

But it is also possible for some people or for some groups of people that one of the above types of intelligence stands for the biggest part (e.g. 80%) of the total man’s intelligence.

The type of intelligence that expresses the majority of the total intelligence is called the dominant intelligence. Practically domi-nant intelligence in all different societies is the EQ or the IQ.

155

The equations of IQ and EQ

When considering the historical data we get to the result that there is a strong correlation between the political systems, the types of writing, the types of conception and of the dominant intelligence.

Specifically, in the societies where the dominant intelligence was the IQ , there was developed the alphabetical writing, the open conception and the political regime of democracy.

On the contrary in the societies where the dominant intelligence was the EQ, there were developed the symbolic writings, the established (dogmatic) conception and theocratic/monarchic political systems.

The above views, that today we are aware that they are com-patible with the features and the performances of logic and co-herent speculations, they could be expressed under the follow-ing mathematical form34:

IQ= alphabetical writing +open conception + democracy

EQ = symbolic writing +established conception +monarchy

We rush to clarify that these relationship have statistical and not deterministic standing.

The first relation stood clearly in ancient Greece that gave birth to logic, open conception and democracy. It stood for the an-cient Greeks that were the first people to develop IQ into the dominant intelligence.

The second relationship stood and it is still standing in eastern and other countries where obviously: symbolic writing, dogmat-ic concept, theocratic political systems and EQ coexisted.

34 Demosthenes Kyriazis, “Intelligence of citizens and political systems.” Union of Greek Physicists Journal, issue 25- 26, March 2007.

156

A Colleague

In most contemporary countries people use alphabetical writing and they have a high IQ since they can manage matters that concern science, technology and more generally all the con-temporary human activities.

Still, the quality of political systems shows that there is no real democracy nor open political conception. What do you have to say about that?

Social schizophrenia


Whatever you say is true indeed. I also believe that the pre-vious relations are valid and that you say is due to the diffe-rential use of IQ and EQ.

More specifically, I believe that today people use IQ in order to deal with matters that concern science, technology, economy but they use EQ in order to deal with matters that concern po-litical power and other important issues of humanistic value.

This selective use of IQ and EQ is the cause, why the above groups of activities are being developed with no common goals and rhythms; with no harmony. The average IQ of societies is not small; it is just not being used for political power exercise or for issues of humanistic value.

The basic cause of this paradoxical differential use of IQ and EQ is the established order’s action that systematically and effec-tively is addressed to the emotions and not to the logic of people. The explanation is simple. If the power’s established order was being addressed to people’s IQ it would have been self-annulated.

The above differential use, that it could be called as social schizophrenia, is responsible for the wars, the massive killings of people and many other disasters that people realize impelled by the established order of authority and their EQs.

157

A Colleague

In the new era of information people would possess a much bigger mass of information than what they have today. Given that intelligence is the receiving and the cerebral processing of information, then how people will manage to process such a big mass of information in the new era? It is obvious that if they will make it, there would also be an improvement of the IQ. If they will not make it and they limit themselves only to the re-ceiving of information there will be a degeneration of the IQ. So what it will happen in the new era? An improvement or a dege-neration of the IQ?


Perhaps the answer is not so difficult to be given, if we would be able to consider the possibilities that this technology deep down possess. And these possibilities are to relieve people from time consuming and painful routine operations and not to subs-titute his mind. In this rationale, new technology provides to people time and techno-economic ease to more substantial and deeper cerebral process of information. In plain words, in order to make people manage to cerebrally process the big mass of information, he should use new technology as a tool. In this case his IQ would be improved.

In the contrary case, the new era of information will become a nightmare like the one described in the well-known book of George Orwell “1984”.

If the people of information’s society will decide to use technol-ogy as a tool for the cerebral processing of information, then their IQ would be improved and it would become dominant. But if they insist to the cerebral processing of the big mass of in-formation using traditional tools, will not manage it. Today’s IQ will become shrunk and the paradoxical phenomenon of diffe-rential use will be reinforced.

It is useful to remind that the routine operations of nowadays are not the same with those of the past. Something that in the

158

past was a difficult, time consuming and of high cost spiritual work, today – thanks to technology- is a routine operation, easy, fast and of negligible cost.

159

Discussion of 3rd June

Subject: Democracy and modern physics


The democracy of the ancient Greek spirit is a system of exer-cising political power based on the moral principle that people by nature, by God, are all equal as far as their natural, spiritual and psychic power is concerned. Obviously, this axiomatic prin-ciple does not stand when we consider people to be individual beings. It does stand though – and more precisely it is the standing truth – when we consider a set of people, when we put in question a society.

This principle, deep down it coincides with the logic of the total and of the random which was developed and is being used in modern physics. This logic nowadays is highly appre-ciated and it is accepted not only in physics but also in other sciences as well as in philosophy.

On the determinism of the total and of the random, the three fundamental institutions of Athenian Democracy are based. These are the institutions: of the Ecclesia of Demos, the Justice administration and the Leaders of the citizens.

We have already talked for these institutions in our previous discussions. But let us now reconsider them as creations of this logic.

Ecclesia of Demos and logic of the total

In ancient Greece all big decisions concerning the citizens and the state, were taken by the total of the citizens. That is, they were being taken by the General Assemblies of the citizens which were called Ecclesia of Demos.

Decisions of that kind taken by the Ecclesia were: The institu-tion of laws, the declaration of wars, the judgment of big of-fences committed by leaders or citizens and generally the tak-

160

ing of the “major” decisions concerning the citizens and their state.

From all the aforementioned it is obvious that in ancient Athens the power was possessed by the citizens as a set and not by one or some “components” of the set; that is by individuals se-lected by the citizens on the criterion of their special moral and spiritual powers.

At that time, the legislative, the governing and the judicial power was carried by the total of the citizens; the set of the citizens was the unique and top power carrier.

Justice Administration and logic of total

In ancient Athens there was the faith that the righteousness of courts’ decisions was being ensured by the big number of citi-zens – judges.

That is the reason why the number of courts’ members was being increased depending on the seriousness of the offence. Major offences were being judged by the Ecclesia, by the total of the citizens.

Judicial decisions were taken by the total of the citizens, named “ostracisms” (οστρακισμοί). Ostracisms were referendums in which voting were done by use cells, (potsherds, όστρακα)35.

The aforementioned faith was characterized by researchers 36 of ancient Greek civilization, “curious faith”.

But, in Statistic Physics this faith is not curious. It is a basic presupposition for the validity of the determinism of the logic of the total.

35 In ostracisms, citizens wrote on a cell the name of the accused man and dropped it in a certain field. If the written cells were equal to the citizens’ ma-jority, then the accused man, as a rule a leader, was guilty. 36 Ulrich von Wilamowiitz, Plato.

161

Leaders and logic of the random

Leaders (άρχοντες) in the ancient Greek language of Homer’s years were called those that were placed at the beginning of an organized formation. (Αρχή = beginning, άρχοντες = men at the beginning).

The leaders in ancient Greece and more specifically in Athens had no essential power. They were neither legislating, nor judg-ing, and they were not the ones to take strategic or political decisions.

In those days, the leaders were the servants and the deacons of the Ecclesia of Demos.

In the Ecclesia leaders and citizens had the same power: One vote.

Leaders and citizens had the right to propose the WHAT and WHY should be decided in the Ecclesia. It is possible that the majority of decisions in the Ecclesia were being taken after pro-posals of the leaders. But this is no political power. It is the spi-ritual and moral power of each leader, of each citizen.

The appointment of the leaders was taking place after random choice (drawing lots) or with circular terms of all citizens. In some cases this was taking place through election, through vot-ing. Practically in ancient Greece only military leaders were be-ing appointed through voting.

The act to prefer, for leader’s appointment, the random choice than the election, shows that the principle of citizens’ equality was a sincere faith and not a verbalism. It also shows the un-derstanding that any forthcoming difficulty inherent in the pre-diction of man’s special abilities is being proved only through the exercise of power. (Αρχή άνδρα δείκνυσι. Power exercise pushes forward man’s abilities).

It is useful to point that in those days the determinism of the total and of the random was neither understood nor it had the status that it enjoys today. On the contrary, the morality of the

162

total was being understood and it enjoyed a very big status. Plato, who was actually a harsh critic of the democratic regime, he used to say that in order to govern correctly a state there should be that either all citizens to be philosophers, (democra-cy) or that only the philosophers should govern (aristocracy).

On the contrary, the morality of the random was and still is in-definable and incomprehensible even nowadays. Maybe that is the reason why Plato called Democracy an absurd political re-gime where the leaders are not the best citizens but the citizens that their turn has come.

In today’s “Democracies”, that actual all power is transferred by the Ecclesia to the Leaders, many people trust more the ran-dom choice of them than the expectation of choosing the per-fect ones through voting that possess rules and practices de-fined only by the Leaders without citizens’ participation.

As a result from the aforementioned we understand that an-cient Greeks appreciated, trusted and used the logic of the total and of the random. This was a sovereign and cru-cial decision of them which after two and a half thousand years is rationally justified by the conclusions of the Statistic Mechan-ics and Quantum Mechanics.

A Colleague

From the things that you say we should also say that ancient Greeks had also discovered quantum mechanics?


Of course not; such a claim would be an illogical exaggeration.

With all the things I said we should come to the conclusion that ancient Greeks, although they did not know about statistic me-chanics and quantum mechanics, they were using and they were trusting their determinism in the most important, as far as humanity is concerned, issue; the issue of the exercise of polit-ical power.

163

A Colleague

You do not think that this opinion of yours is totally arbitrary since it has no logical explanation?


It may have some logical explanation.

As it is known, the advantage and the same time the disadvan-tage of ancient Greeks was that they were trying to understand everything through logical speculations without supporting and confirming their standing through experiment. This process un-til the beginning of the 21st century seemed as very important deficit of substantiation.

At the beginning of the 21st century (2000-2002) researchers have discovered that people possess apart from logical intelli-gence (IQ) and emotional one (EQ) ,as well as a third type of intelligence, the spiritual intelligence (SQ).

The SQ constitutes the sovereign intelligence that is checking the conclusions of EQ and IQ; the conclusion of logic and cohe-rence.

It is possible that the achievements of ancient Greeks are owed to the significant growth of their SQ; to their SQ’ s action.

A Colleague

What they told us in a previous discussion about the dominant IQ and what you tell us about the sovereign SQ have confused me. At the end, what is the basis of the achievements of the ancient Greek civilizations; the dominant IQ or the sovereign SQ?


You are right. Let us try to clarify the matter.

In ancient Greece, thanks to the SQ the transformation of IQ to dominant intelligence was carried with respect to its “older

164

sister” the EQ. The IQ, although dominant, was cooperating in harmony and with no arrogance with the EQ.

Thus, ancient Greek civilization was founded on the harmonic cooperation of the dominant IQ with the older and respected sister the EQ, by the supervision of the sovereign SQ.

Here is an example of such cooperation: Athenians asked the oracle at Delphi - the temple of EQ - what they should do in order to win the Persians and it answered: You should build wooden walls. However, Athenians thanks to their SQ and IQ understood that the oracle meant that they should build military ships.37

A Colleague

In previous discussions it was mentioned that democracy is a social system of low entropy. This view is related to the present view that democracy is based on the logic of the total and of the random?


The logic of the total and of the random has standing value and it is being implemented in natural systems that are being con-stituted by a big mass of elements that they are – or at least they are considered to be – equal. A basic characteristic of these systems is entropy.

Let us remind that entropy in modern physics is being defined as “the measure of ataxia” (disorder) or “the reciprocal of the information’s measure”. Consequently low entropy means small measure of ataxia or big measure of information.

We come to the conclusion from these definitions that demo-cracies constitute political systems of low social entropy be-cause the power remains practically to its natural carriers, the citizens. Also in these political systems, the possibility of the 37 This data are included in “Herodotus’ History,” book 7th, about Persian – Greek Wars; Herodotus (5th century BC) was named “the father of history.”

165

access of all citizens to the information is being maximized be-cause all citizens are rulers and being ruled.

Consequently, systems with low entropy - or with big transpa-rency, as politicians and sociologists prefer to call it - are only the democracies of the ancient Greek spirit; the true democra-cies.

A Colleague

Your views are sensational. But do they still have a practical value besides the attempt to create this sensation?


I understood well the spirit of your question. But I would like to assure you that these opinions were not phrased just to create a sensation but instead because I sincerely believe that they have a practical value as much as in the short term as well as in the long term.

The crisis of contemporary democracies is owed to the fact that deep down people, do neither understand nor they trust the determinist capabilities of the total and of the random.

Besides, the determinism of the total and of the random was mainly developed by the Statistic mechanics relatively recently.

I have the opinion that sooner or later they will be taken se-riously into consideration by the sciences of sociology and of politics.

A Colleague

Which is the long term value of these ideas?


It is obvious that these ideas are in an embryonic state.

Still, it is possible that in the future some other people that know very well the philosophy and the possibilities of modern physics and they are also interested in sociology and in politics

166

that they would develop more specific and more useful ideas relating to this subject.

167

Discussion 4th of June

Subject: Prigogine's theories and the Athenian Democracy's institutions


Ilya Prigogine was born in Moscow a few months before the Russian Revolution of 1917. Due to the fact that his father had a critical standing against the new Bolshevik regime, his family migrated in 1921 to Germany. Eight years later, in 1929, the family of the twelve year old Ilya settled in Brussels.

In his new home country, Ilya grew up, studied physics and chemistry and made the first steps of his scientific career. In 1949 he assumed the Belgian nationality.

The most important stages of his scientific development were the following:

• 1950 Professor in the University of Brussels • 1959 Director in the International Institute of Research in

Brussels • 1959 Transition to the Texas University of USA, at the

beginning as a lecturer and little later as a professor of Physics and Chemistry.

• 1967 He returns to Brussels where he assumes the position of director in the Centre of Statistic Mechanics and Thermodynamics

• 1977 He was awarded the Nobel prize

Ilya Prigogin died in Brussels in 2003 at the age of 86. Until the day of his death he was President of the International Academy of Sciences.

Brief description of Prigogine work

Deterministic and chaotic systems

In order to understand the pioneering work and the important contribution of Prigogine in the study of the natural, biological

168

and social systems, it is necessary to remember the basic cha-racteristics of the deterministic and chaotic phenomena and systems.

We call the systems and the phenomena deterministic, whose behavior and evolution is being determined in absolute certain-ty because they stem out of a specific, known and unchangea-ble cause or causes (logic of determinism).

We call the systems and the phenomena chaotic, whose beha-vior and evolution is due to many and changeable causes and for that reason are indefinable, chaotic (logic of the chaos theory).

An example of a deterministic phenomenon is the fall of ob-jects, not into the atmosphere but in the vacuum (free fall). The course of the free fall is being determined in absolute cer-tainty and accuracy by the laws of Newton that we learned in High School38. The cause of this determinism is the force of gravity.

It is being said that what lead to the discovery of Newton's laws was the fall of an apple to his head.

The fall of a stone in the atmosphere is being determined by Newton's laws in a very big approximation. Still, this does not stand for the fall of all objects into the atmosphere.

An example of a chaotic phenomenon is the fall into the atmos-phere of a tree leaf or of a feather.

Out of our personal experience we know that the “fall” of a feather is not being determined by Newton's laws. It is being rather determined by the “law” of the “floating feather”.

Phenomena such as the fall of a feather, the meteorological phenomena, the open thermodynamic systems, the biological systems (e.g. human organism), the social systems (e.g.

38 These laws, in mathematical formalism, are being written: g=stable, u=g.t and h=1/2 g.t²

169

Greeks' society), whose behaviour and evolution is indetermin-able or at least is being defined in a very difficult way, are be-ing called chaotic.

In the austere scientific language of Physics, chaotic phenome-na are being called the phenomena that are being described by non linear differential equations: that is by equations that are not being solved or that we do not know until now how to solve.

A second more understandable definition is the following: Chao-tic are the phenomena and the systems that present an ex-treme sensitivity to their initial conditions. A slight change to them produces subversion to their course and renders it inde-finable.

Consequently, chaotic systems are not deterministic indefinable but instead practically indefinable. The chaos theory does not cancel determinism but it rather completes it.

Open thermodynamic systems

Prigogine since the first years of his scientific career was occu-pied with the study and the research concerning the open thermodynamic systems. That is the systems whose behaviour and evolution is very difficult if not impossible to determine.

It is useful to remind that open thermodynamic systems are being called the systems that exchange (give and take) energy with the environment, while the closed ones are those that do not exchange.

The closed thermodynamic systems have been extensively stu-died in classic physics. This abstractional simplification led to the understanding and to the discovery of the thermodynamics’ laws; something similar to the process that used by Newton to the discovery the gravity and the laws of objects’ fall.

This abstract ional methodology led to the following extremely important successes:

(1) To the discovery of the basic laws of nature

170

(2) To the use of mathematics in the study of natural pheno-mena and

(3) To the biggest and fastest due to the use of mathematics development of Physics, comparing to that of the other sciences.

This abstractional methodology is the one that, according to our perception, lead to the triumph of determinism.

This undoubtable offer of determinism had nonetheless a nega-tive outcome. It created an elitistic mentality that confronted any non deterministic logic with a small interest if not in an ar-rogant way.

Through the elitistic mentality, the solution of every problem should always come as a result of the deepening of the well of determinism

Prigogin subverted this mentality; he believed that the solution to every problem should result by the deepening and the broa-dening of this well. A second outcome of Prigogin which presents an obvious credibility was that the majority of systems -natural, biological, social, economical- are open systems (they interact with the environment) and consequently they should possess a common or at least a relative determinism.

Prigogin, since the first days of his scientific life, worked at the open thermodynamic systems. It is possible that this occupation of his was the cause that leads to new ways of perception and methods of solving problems. It was possibly something similar to the apple that fell to the head of the father of natural sciences; of Newton.

In these new ways, Prigogine’s efforts took a holistic, interdis-ciplinary and philosophical character; a character different to the austere deterministic of classic physics. Prigogine by moving in these new ways, he located those basic and similar dynamic procedures of nature that stand in many fields; from cosmology and the physics of elementary particles to biology and sociolo-gy. This new way has the summarizing name: “Bridging and

171

unification of classic physics, philosophy, biology, soci-ology and technological applications conceptions”.

Those efforts of his were summarized by the Swedish commit-tee that granted him the Nobel Prize as following:

“...he gave new relations and he created new theories in order to bridge the gap between the biological and the sociological scientific fields of research”.

Prigogine’s theories related to the Principles of Democracy

A Colleague

Which theories of Prigogine are being related to the institutions of Athenian democracy? This correlation is documented or it presents big doses of imagination?

Colleague-Introducer

The subject of documentation is something that you will judge by evaluating all those that would be mentioned in our discus-sion.

Nonetheless, the most important ideas and theories of Prigo-gine, which are being related to the institutions of the Athenian democracy, according to our perception are the following:

(1)The non-existence of simplicity and hierarchy in the natu-ral systems

(2) The random character of the evolutionary process and the value of probability

(3) The self-organization.

A Colleague

It would be very interesting if you could do a brief review of those theories and a correlation of them to the principles and institutions of the Athenian Democracy.

172


Let us attempt that. Still, I would like to say that such an effort is not easy to be covered within the boundaries of a discussion.

The non existence of simplicity and hierarchy

Prigogine believes that the simplicity does not exist in nature but only in the mind of human beings. In nature there exists complexity.

The neat and elegant view of philosophers and physicists that any level of scientific description is being built on the precedent level, and as a consequence the descriptions of the basic level of rudimental elements and fundamental powers have priority, does not stand true.

But let us try to present some historical arguments of the above idea.

Philosophers and scientists alike believed that underneath the apparent complexity of the world, there is being hidden a sim-ple structure, that is that simplicity exists.

This view is very old and diachronic. It was phrased by the an-cient Greek philosophers and more specifically by Democritus and Aristotle that also determined the form of this simplicity.

Democritus (460-370 b.C) expressed the view that the world is structured by similar simple structural elements that are not being further intersected; the “atoms”.39

Aristotle (384-322 b.C) expressed the view that the world is structured by four structural elements with a continuous com-position, which can be constantly intersected; Earth, Water, Air and Fire. Still, he was not limited into defining the rudimental elements by which the world is structured but he went on to the definition of the fundamental powers, of the “glue” that

39 Atom (άτομο) in Greek means the structural element that cannot be divided furthermore.

173

unites the rudimental elements in the unified and beautiful structure of the world; of cosmos40.

The fundamental powers according to Aristotle are two: gravity and lightness. Due to gravity, earth and water move down-wards, while due to lightness, air and fire move upwards.

Thousand years later the only thing that changed was our view on the forms of the rudimental elements and the kinds of the fundamental powers by which the world was structured.

For example, in the 1950's we were considering that the rudi-mental elements are the protons, the neutrons and the elec-trons, while we knew few things about the fundamental powers which unite them in order that they could be able to form a nucleus, an atom, a molecule, a star, a galaxy, the cos-mos.

Today, the subject of the rudimental, of the basic, elements has lost the simplicity that possessed during the era of Democritus and that of the 1950's. Today there has been experimentally discovered a very big number of rudimental elements -the “atoms” of Democritus- whose catalogue is constantly growing. Today we consider that exist a lot of basic elements; six differ-ent types of quarks - up, down, strange, charm, bottom, top – electrons, leptons, neutrinos…”a whole zoo of rudimental ele-ments through which the world is being structured”.

The simplicity in the basic elements of matter seems as if it comes to a dead end, it seems to be a utopia.

Instead of the simplicity of the basic elements of matter, today the physicists are trying to locate the simplicity of the funda-mental powers, of the glue that unites these basic elements.

Nowadays we know that these powers are four: gravity, elec-tromagnetic, weak nuclear interaction and strong nuclear inte-raction. Nonetheless, the researchers are trying to discover the

40 Cosmos ( Κόσμος) in Greek means top jewel; top beauty.

174

“superpower” that unifies them; the superpower that has the aforementioned four powers as daughters. In spite of the many efforts that have been done, neither this superpower has not be found or at least not yet.

Prigogine also believes that there is no hierarchy in nature in the sense that it exists in human systems, especially in the so-cial ones.

The structural and development laws of nature are democratic and not monarchic.

A Colleague

These ideas are revolutionary and they contradict the theory of the unified field and the efforts of so many researchers that try to discover what you have called superpower. You do not think that these ideas collide with the ideas of Quantum Mechanics?


I agree with you. But we should rather call it a different view. Not collision.

This different view leads Prigοgine to suggest the change of direction of the efforts; to suggest their orientation to the un-derstanding of the laws of interaction between the powers and the phenomena. Time will tell which of the two views is the cor-rect one.

Let us try now to correlate the aforementioned with the prin-ciples and institutions of Athenian Democracy.

As it is easily comes out by the simple viewing of the practices and of the institutions of Athenian Democracy, in this regime, there is neither hierarchy, nor there has been done any effort of simplification and documentation of its institutions and prin-ciples. Here is an example of such a practice and an example of such an institution.

(1) In ancient Greece, democracy was a self-evident value, without simplicity or complexity. That is the reason why there

175

was no philosophical documentation of the necessity and of the morality of this regime. Whatever had already been written concerned the description, the weaknesses, the disadvantages and the advantages of Democracy.

The views expressed by Plato, the austere judge of Democracy, have the same target. The Plato’s view that “in order to govern a city in the right way, either all citizens should be philosophers (democracy) or there should only govern the philosophers (aris-tocracy)”, is a realistic and not a negative standing for democ-racy, We should probably bring back to mind that in ancient Greece language, aristos (άριστος), is the one who possesses moral and natured power and not the one who possesses social and financial power; one man of nowadays aristocracy.

Contrary to the aforementioned practice of ancient Greek, the necessity and the morality of today's representative democra-cies needed to be documents through many philosophical ar-guments. Such arguments appeared in the theories of “Social Contracts”; of English Thomas Hobbes, of French Jean Jack Rousseau and others. In these theories people are not being considered as carriers of power -as considered in the regime of Athenian Democracy- but they are rather considered as “partners/ servants” of the rulers; of the powerful men.

In contemporary representative democracies, during our efforts to achieve simplicity and documentation, we even lost the sim-plicity and the spirit of ancient Greek democracy.

(2) The lack of hierarchy is clearly evident in the institution of the Ecclesia of Demos as well as in the institution of the lead-ers’ competences.

The Ecclesia of Demos in ancient Athens was the only and the sovereign vehicle for exercising any kind of power; of the legis-lative, the executive, and of the judicial. In those days all power was in the hands of the of citizens’ set.

During that time, the leaders were neither making laws, nor they judged and they were not also taking the strategic deci-

176

sions that nowadays' leaders do. During those days, the leaders were the deacons of the Ecclesia of Demos; of the Ecclesia which composed by citizens with the status of ruler and being ruled.

In the Ecclesia citizens and leaders alike possessed the same power; one vote. Pericles, the greatest leader of Athens, in Ec-clesia had the same power with a farmer of Attica who might not know to read and to write.

The Value of Random and Probability.

According to the classical conceptions, the term random refers to systems and phenomena that are being developed and go-verned with blind eyes; that they lack of goals and meaning.

Still, according to Prigogine random is synonym: To non de-terminism, to spontaneous, to innovation and to crea-tivity. It is a new and revolutionary view.

Also, according to the classical conceptions, the development and the evolution of systems are deterministic; they possess an absolute and argumented certainty. The first breach to this conception was created by the second law of Thermodynamics, namely the law of entropy. The law of entropy does not stand in an argumented certainty but it stand in a big probability, stemming out of the statistical data of practice.

For example the saying: “in August is not snowing in Athens”, has no deterministic certainty, but it has high probability. We cannot dismiss the fact that one day it may snow in August. Something similar but with higher probability stands for the law of entropy.

The second and bigger breach to the conception in question was created by the Heisenberg’ Principle of Uncertainty in Quantum Mechanics. According to this principle, which stands for the sub atomic particles, for micro cosmos, it is im-possible to know in a certainty the position and the momentum

177

(the velocity) of a particle41. This principle obliged on one hand the physicists to describe situations through the use of probabil-ity instead of that of certainty and on the other it also obliged the philosophers to coherently expand the principle of uncer-tainty to other spaces besides that of the microcosmos, some-thing that we do not yet know if it is right or wrong.

Prigogin comes to document the view that Heisenberg’s prin-ciple of uncertainty also stands in the open thermodynamic, in the biological, and in the social systems; that it generally stands in all systems that interact with the environment.

Prigogin's new principle of uncertainty tells us that when the complexity of the systems in question surpasses a cer-tain point of limit, then the systems are heading to-wards unforeseen and uncertain situations.

It is obvious that Prigogin's new principle of uncertainty is of very great importance when we refer to today's very complex social, economical and political systems. It reminds the popular proverb: “when the ant wants to be lost, it grows wings”.

Although ancient Greeks were not aware the aforementioned views on the random and the probable, they were implement-ing them in the most important sector; in the sector of exercis-ing political power. Here we have three indicative examples:

(1) The election of the leaders in the Athenian Democracy was being carried through random choice, by lot, and it was only the election of the military leaders that was being carried out with voting (conscious choice, election).

(2) The decisions in the Ecclesias by the total of citizens were being taken based on the principle of majority. It is obvious that decisions of that kind do not present the certainty but in-stead the high probability, to be rational.

41This law in mathematical formalism is being written: Δx.Δp >1/2h and it means that the uncertainty of position Δx multiplied with the uncertainty of momentum Δp is bigger or equal to a constant number.

178

(3) After examining the outcomes of the normal distributions, today we are in the position to know that the decisions taken by the set of the citizens present a normal (moderate) rationali-ty but also a very high probability (almost certainty) of securing this rationality. On the contrary, the decisions taken by a Mes-siah present a big degree of rationality but a very slight proba-bility of securing it. What is more, the greater the Messiah the smallest the probability of the existence of a true Messiah. Imi-tation Messiahs are not being determined by the determinism of normal distributions.

The conclusion from the above is that the citizens of Athenian Democracy appreciated more the probability of securing expec-tancy than the size of expectancy. That is, they believed in the old wise saying: “Who wants to get plenty, is going to lose the few, too”.

In ancient Greek democracy it was difficult for the citizens to be duped by verbalistic expectancies.

The self organization

Prigogin's ideas concerning the self organization of systems do not only constitute an innovative view but also a recovery, or at least an approach, of the self organization procedure.

The self organization phenomenon is tightly connected to the phenomenon of life itself and that is the reason why it appears in a more intense way in the living than in the still systems. But self organization is not a privilege of the living systems.

The Prigogine’s self organization procedure is not easy to be described. Still in a first approach, we could say that self organ-ization is an outcome of “information storage” into the mole-cules that develop the capability to produce a useful work, like the metabolism or reproduction. The self organization proce-dure is evolving furthermore according to the law of “natural choice”.

The self organization leads to more effective and to more stable systems than those of man organization ones.

179

The unsurpassable classical civilisation of Athens, that devel-oped in time and space where there existed the regime based on the citizens’ set, on the random , on probability and on self organization, the original democracy, constitute possibly the biggest and the most characteristic example of the Prigogine’s theories value and validity.

The conclusion into which we are led by all the aforementioned, is that the institutions of Athenian Democracy are so much compatible with Prigogine's theories, that appear to fully justify the next question:

The ideas of Athenian Democracy have been formed by Prigo-gin's ideas or Prigogin's ideas have been formed by those of Athenian Democracy?

A Colleague

Everything that you said is rational views. I think though that they do not present a big practical value when it comes to the analysis and the solution of the problems that exist in today's democracies. In my opinion they constitute some general thoughts. What is your opinion?


I agree with you. Still I believe that always this happens; al-ways the first steps are small and unstable.

Nonetheless, the unstable initial steps usually result into caus-ing similar efforts by other citizens who are experts on subjects of sociology, politics or of modern physics.

My personal view is that sooner or later Prigogine's ideas will acquire a practical value in the field of analysis and develop-ment democratic systems; they will be used for the analysis and solution of the representative democracies’ problems, as it has already been done for the problems of Biology.

181

Instead of epilogue

Today, problems in physics are being phrased and studied with the use of austere rationality based on clear and catholic validi-ty principles.

As it is known, this austere rationality did not exist in the past. It is a relatively recent achievement of man.

In relation to this achievement, the Nobel awarded Emilio Segré is writing in his book “History of Physics”:

“The biblical history of Genesis could be rewritten in a modern way as follows:

• “Let there be light” takes the form:

. 4 . 01 1 4

E BB E jE B

c t c t c

πρϑ ϑ πϑ ϑ

∇ = ∇ =

∇× =− ∇× = +

That are the Maxwell’s equations; the equations of the electro-magnetic field of light.

• The motion of planets takes the form:

2mMF ma F kR

= =

That are the Newton’s equations; the equations of Fundamen-tal Low of Mechanics and of Low of the Universal Gravitation.”

Let us hope there would be a day that man would be able to display ideas and events of politics in a similar way of catholic validity; to be able to easily discern right from wrong, truth from lie.

Man that “reached” the atom and went to the moon, surely possess this ability. He only has to make an effort and to not face obstacles similar to those that Galileo had to face.

182

PART III Digital technology as an opportunity and as a

vehicle for democracy’s expansion and regeneration

• Digital technology of interactive networks brought to life the dream of humanists and the aspiration of technocrats for a catholic democratic technology of information’s dis-posal and processing.

• The interactive networks constitute a tool for the reduction of social entropy.

• The oncoming globalization, make Pnyka’s digitalization indispensable and urgent.

• Only one digital referendum per year on the major issues of the state of Telearea was enough to be evolved the sta-tus of the “ruler and being ruled” citizen and to be im-proved significantly the quality of democracy.

185

Discussion of 6th June

Subject: Technology of the Mass Media and political systems


The connections between technology and systems of political power were created with the development of technologies that enabled the informing, the emancipation and the demagoguery of people.

Such technologies were those concerning the production of pa-pyrus, of vellums and of paper; of the materials on which pow-er carriers were writing by hand their orders and instructions to the people.

Several years after, the German monk Gutenberg (1400-1468) perfected the technology of typography through which it be-came feasible to produce many copies of a written message, in a fast way and with a low cost. The first book to be printed with the help of this new technology was the Bible.

The products of the technology in question, books, newspapers and magazines rendered this interrelation of political power and technology to be more direct and stronger.

Radio times

The first decades of the 20th century it was developed the tech-nology of radio which contributed in a great way to the moder-nization and the empowerment of these connections.

New technology provided the political power, the ability to ac-quire “electronic preachers” who could get into the houses of the citizens and to work day and night for informing them on the views of the authority. The new way of circulating informa-tion presented many advantages. It was easy, friendly, flexible and of low cost. It was still discreet, gentle, persisting and for that reason effective.

186

The provision of information concerning the views of power was not appearing as a main goal but as a secondary one, as a pa-renthesis. The main goal of radio was typically to educate and to entertain the citizens and not the promotion of power’s aspi-rations.

The above mentioned information medias –newspapers, radio and later television- were called Mass Media. The term “Mass” defined the massive and low cost way of informing the citizens. However, today it defines also the philosophy of managing the receivers of the information; the citizens.

Into this philosophy, the citizens are considered to be a “mass of people” and not individuals with intellect and critical thinking. This philosophy in theory is not being adopted by anybody. But in practice, it is being adopted by many.

The cause of this massive management of people is a techno-economic characteristic of the Mass Media technology. It is the securing of all citizens’ access only to the receiving in-formation.

In Mass Media, it is not feasible to have access to the transmitting information all citizens; only the owners and the people of Mass Media, it is feasible to have.

As it was natural, the few ones that had the access to the transmission of information acquired a lot of power and for that reason they took the name “fourth authority”.

The power concentration to the people of the “fourth authori-ty”, many times, proved to be much greater than the one pos-sessed by the institutional political authority.

This strength of technology’s interrelation with the political power systems, results also by the following historical event:

The epidemic of dictatorships in Europe –of German Nazi, Ital-ian fascism and many others- coincides in time with the techno-economic maturing of the radio technology of electronic tubes.

187

It is useful to remind that Nazi had developed a simple and low cost radio set, which people could buy by post stabs. This radio maybe was the “more effective arm” of Nazi.

Many people believe today, that without the radio technology, this epidemic of dictatorships would not have been so greatly expanded.

Television times

The information carried by books and newspapers have the form of written speech while those carried by the radio have the form of oral speech.

Due to this difference, getting information through radio is con-sidered to be easier and friendlier than getting it through books and newspapers.

And something other very important: The sending of informa-tion through radio is easier and more flexible but also rougher than the information carried by written texts. “Writings stay, words go away” used to say for thousands of years.

In the television technology which appeared in the midst of the 20th century, the carried information has the form of the written speech (text) as well as those of the oral speech (voice) and of the image (video). With such technical features, the power of television’s information became very big.

As it is known, people have a limit of endurance against any kind of pressure: Physical, intellectual, psychological. When this limit is passed over, there comes the equivalent of the pressure “collapse” of people.

People have a similar endurance limit against the pressure of information. When this is passed over, people do not control the information but the information controls people.

The existence of this limit and the big power of information that television possess made believe that today, in the TV era, the greatest problem is not WHAT we say but HOW we say it. If we find the appropriate HOW, we can face the problem of WHAT.

188

And vice versa; most simple WHAT, it can become a serious and complicated problem if it is not accompanied by the appro-priate HOW.

The combined power of image, voice and text has been proved to be greater than the power of truth and logic.

The oligarchic features of Mass Media

To incriminate technology because we use it for bad purposes constitutes an absurdity. The responsibility for the good or the bad use of technology belongs exclusively to the people and not to technology.

Technology has another responsibility: The economical and functional feasibility of being used by everybody or by few ones.

If the techno-economic features of technology lead to its use by all people, then we have technologic democracy. In the con-trary we have technologic oligarchy.

In the case of Mass Media, the technology of receiving the in-formation is democratic because it is accessible by all people. Anybody can to day acquire a book, a radio or a TV.

The technology of transmitting the information is oligarchic be-cause it is not accessible to everybody. The publication of a book, the acquisition of a radio or a TV station or even the phrasing of a view in such a station, is not possible for a simple citizen.

Within the framework of the techno-economic features of the Mass Media, the institution of free access to the information has only theoretical value. In practice, people today may hear freely what is being said, but people themselves do not possess the practical ability to express their own views.

We rush to clarify that the “oligarchic features of the Mass Me-dia” do not cancel their big offer to the informing and to the emancipation of people.

189

The techno-economic features of any technology, either of an oligarchic one or a democratic one, cannot define by them-selves the purpose of technology’s use. The definition of the purpose is an exclusive responsibility of people. The knife is a product of democratic technology. We all have knives. Most of us we use them to cut the bread and to “eat the melon”. Still, some use them also to stab people.

A Colleague

The oligarchic character of transmitting the information in the Mass Media is indeed a very important problem.

Still, this problem cannot be faced with the laws and rules of political power?


The legislation for using devices of oligarchic or democratic technology is indispensable. The fact that all citizens can pos-sess a radio does not mean there should not be rules for the use and the functioning of the radios.

The question is which technology creates problems to the oper-ation of democracy that can be easily faced by laws and rules; a democratic technology or an oligarchic one?

Without any doubt, democratic technology creates fewer and smaller problems. The bigger the number of the citizens that possess it, the fewer the problems created in democracy’s func-tioning.

Thirty years ago, in radio times, the problems that exist today in the television, existed in the radio; Oligarchic mentality, dis-criminations, complaints, grumpiness.

Today, that hundreds of radio stations are functioning, today that in every big village there is one or two FM radio stations, these problems have disappeared. They were solved through the institutional liberation of the radio stations’ functioning but mainly through the “democratization of technology”; through the securing of the appropriate techno-economic fea-

190

tures that render feasible the functioning of one or two radio stations in every big village.

A Colleague

Why political leadership does not give the same solution in tele-vision?

Why it resorts to laws of questionable effectiveness and to amendments in the Constitution?


Your question is a very important one.

Like we have already said, the democratization of a technology is not only a matter of taking the proper political decision. It is not only a matter of a low. Before anything else, it is a matter of the techno-economic features of technology.

It is a fact that the technology of radio electric television does not present the necessary techno-economic features for such democratization. Nonetheless, cable television’s technology does present them.

My view is that the development of cable television would solve these problems in a more reliable and effective way than the solution that is being attempted to be given through amend-ments of the Constitution and through voting laws of question-able effectiveness, like the one of the “main shareholder”42.

A Colleague

Your views seem reasonable. Still, why political leadership pre-fers to solve the problem of TV through laws and not through technology? Is it possible that the technological solution has a very big financial cost? Is it possible that deep down inside de-

42 The Mass Media problem in Greece was faced through changes that were in the Constitutional Law and through the legislation of the “Main Shareholder Law”.

191

sires the existence of oligarchic technology with the hope that it will be used towards the fulfillment of its aspirations?


I do not know which one of the above stands true. Nonethe-less, I realize that your questioning is reasonable and that all citizens are entitled to a documented answer.

I also know that from the offered two solutions, that of demo-cratic technology through reasonable legislation and that of oligarchic technology through hard legislation, the right and effective one is the first. The institutional and techno-economic liberation of the radio sends a clear message.

A Colleague

You connected radio technology with epidemic of dictatorships in Europe. However, there is not a similar connection in relation to TV’s technology. Is it possible that the things we say about TV are views that are not historically documented?


It is a fact that in television times we did not have the estab-lishment of many dictatorships.

Still, we had a reconsidering of the values’ hierarchy concerning the WHAT and the HOW that we mentioned earlier. However, this reconsidering of the values’ hierarchy is an equally risky phenomenon like the one of the dictator regimes’ appearance. This reconsidering of values’ hierarchy, which happens in the TV era, resulted in the change of the spirit of institutions and not to their letter. And this is equally dangerous even than the abolishment of spirit and letter of democratic institu-tions.

The fact that politicians and experts speak about “Televised Democracy” and “Televised Courts”, is not irrelevant.

192

May be this camouflaged practice is, in long-term, more dan-gerous than the obvious dictatorships of Europe during the 20th century.

193


Subject: Digital technology of interactive networks


Mass Media technology secures the techno-economic freedom of the citizens only as far as the receiving of information is con-cerned.

In the transmission of information the securing of freedom is not feasible for all citizens but only for a small category of citi-zens which has at its disposal the required money assets and the necessary natural asset of the frequencies.

The development of a catholic democratic technology that would posses such techno-economic features, that all citizens would have the same possibilities in the receiving and the transmitting of information, was the dream of humanists and the aspiration of technocrats.

This dream became a reality through the digital technology of interactive networks.

The term interactive states the existence of the techno-economic ability that is lacking in the Mass Media. That is of the ability ensuring the free access of all citizens not only in the receiving but also in the transmitting of any form of informa-tion; mass or personal; text, voice, image, data.

But how it was born, where it is today and how it is expected to be developed in the future, this technology?

The birth and the development

The technology of interactive networks was created by the co-operation, and by the crossover of Telecommunications and Information technology. These technologies do not have as their purpose the production of mechanical work, as all the oth-ers technologies have. They have as their purpose the produc-

194

tion of another form of work which is usually called in-tellectual work; the easy and low cost, processing, circulation and disposal of information.

The technology of interactive networks started with the purpose of the computers’ communication and mainly for the computers used for military purposes. The extent of the purpose to the form that it has today became slowly during the course of the technology’s development.

In the first years, computers had oligarchic and mystified fea-tures.

• They were big and they cost a lot of money.

• They needed a whole building to house the machines and the people that were operating them.

• The computer’s entrance data had to present the form of a perforated card.

• The space of computer’s operation had equally austere specifications as those required for a surgery.

• Whoever wanted to type a page of text should have had a PhD.

• Computers’ technology was not at all democratic.

The aforementioned purposes and features became the cause of distant – if not of contrary – views, between humanists and technocrats. They became the cause that humanists and tech-nocrats did not cooperate so as to make this new technology a vehicle for broader humanist changes such as the participation of citizens to the exercise of power.

Instead of a cooperation there was attempted the incrimination of technology and of the technocrats for the usual phenomena of technology’s misuse.

Still, this standing is absurd and unfair. It is equally absurd and unfair as to consider that the responsible for a fire is the fire

195

itself and Prometheus that stole it from the Gods and not the arsonist.

Later, the use of big computers was expanded through the de-velopment and the use of terminal devices, which could be used by people who wanted to send or to receive information by or towards a big computer. It was the era of common use; of the computers’ leasing.

During these times, the appropriate long wires they were used to connect the terminals with the computer (mainframe). This is how the first computer networks were developed.

In the first networks, computer and terminals were functioning in different spaces of the same building. They were the net-works of local area; the LAN (Local Area Network).

Later, the wires became longer. Terminals and computer were functioning in different buildings of a wider area. Of a research center, a military base, a university campus. They were the networks of wide areas; the WAN (Wide Area Network).

During the times of the WAN, the technology of Personal Com-puters was developed, the well known PCs.

The PCs had all the abilities of the terminal appliances and they could also carry through the same work as the big computers of a smaller extent.

Now the terminals were replaced by the PCs which were ma-chines of the same philosophy as the big computers but they had very low cost.

With this breakthrough all terminal positions changed possibili-ties. From the position they had to send and to receive data now they were in the position of “processing, sending and re-ceiving information”. They acquired the same abilities as the big computer. The democratization of the computers’ technology had just started.

The areas of the WAN they were getting wider and wider month by month. Then it became apparent that the cost to es-

196

tablish a network in a wider area, in a city, in a country was bigger than the cost of these computers.

This serious problem was solved with the use of telecommuni-cations networks; of the telecommunications’ lines.

With the help of telecommunications’ lines there could be created, fast and with a low cost, WANs of big extent: in a city, in a country, in many countries, in all countries of the world. It was a problem of using existing infrastructures.

The financial problem was overcome. But it could not be over-come the following technical problem: The existing telecommu-nications’ networks were of analog technology while the com-puters of digital. This was creating many and serious problems in the cooperation of computers and telecommunications’ lines.

This problem was faced with an international program of con-gruity between telecommunications and informatics. Despite the diplomatic name of the program, the congruity concerned in essence only the telecommunications.

In practice, the congruity demanded changes only in the tele-communications’ organisms. The congruity demanded the mas-sive replacement of the existing analog telecommunication networks with new networks of digital technology and the change of their monopoly functioning into a competitive one. The telecommunications’ organisms were the ones that paid the cost of congruity.

In the new digital technology any form of information (text, voice, image, data), is structured by the same basic informa-tion. It is structured by the information digits 1 and 0; the bits. All the forms of information are constructed by bits; they differ only in the volume and the transmission speed of the bits.

From the moment that any terminal place of the network was upgraded into a station of information processing and circula-tion, the networks should be interactive and independent by their size.

197

Thus, we reached to the full democratization of information. Thus we reached the era of information.

The top achievement in the evolution of the INTEReractive NETtworks was the creation of an INTERnational NETwork called INTERNET.

The Internet

The Internet is the international network of computers that connects all the computer networks of the world. It is the inter-national WAN that it was created through the interconnection of all WANs. It is the network of networks.

The international extent and the very big number of Internet’s users create the impression that its organization and manage-ment are complicated and daedal. However, in practice Inter-net’s organization and management are very simple because they are based on the democratic principles of self-organization and self-management.

Let us clarify the above with a summarizing and simplified pres-entation of the Internet.

The Internet, that its simplified block diagram is shown in schema 16, is constituted by three categories of elements:

1. The computers that execute several functions of the net-works and provide some “information assets”. These com-puters have different names and abilities; here for matters of simplicity we call them nodes.

The nodes are connected with other nodes and with the rest of computers possessed by the Internet users.

If one node is connected to a node of other countries, then it is called international. In the contrary it is called local. Any local node is connected to at least one international one.

2. The computers of the Internet’s users. These computers are PCs or computers of greater power.

198

3. The telecommunications’ lines of appropriate technical fea-tures that connect either the nodes between them or the users’ computers with a node. In the first case the connec-tion is being depicted with a closed ring and in the second with radiuses that begin from node. This depiction is very close to the natural forms of the telecommunications’ “lines” forms.

ΔΚ ΔΚ

ΔΚ

ΔΟ

Δ*

Δ*

Δ*ΤΚ ΤΚ

ΤΚ

Memo:ΔΟ

ΤΚ

ΔΚ ΔΚ

ΔΚ

ΔΟ

Δ*

Δ*

Δ*ΤΚ ΤΚ

ΤΚ

:ΔΟΔΔΚ

*

International networkLocal networkInternational nodesLocal nodesPC of Internet usersSimilar networks

ΔΚ ΔΚ

ΔΚ

ΔΟ

Δ*

Δ*

Δ*ΤΚ ΤΚ

ΤΚ

Memo:ΔΟ

ΤΚ

ΔΚ ΔΚ

ΔΚ

ΔΟ

Δ*

Δ*

Δ*ΤΚ ΤΚ

ΤΚ

:ΔΟΔΔΚ

*

International networkLocal networkInternational nodesLocal nodesPC of Internet usersSimilar networks

Schema 16 Simplified block diagram of the Internet

As it is shown in schema 16, Internet constitutes by many simi-lar local networks of computers Δ and by an international net-work Δο.

Any local network Δ includes many local nodes ΤΚ and at least one international ΔΚ. All international nodes are connected be-tween them and they form the international network Δο. In this way, all international and local nodes are interconnected in an international level.

199

Any network and any node have their own organization and management.

The internet has many similarities with international network of airline transport.

Equivalent elements to international nodes are the internation-al airports; to local nodes the local airports; to telecommunica-tions lines the airplane flights.

Any company of airplanes and any airport have autonomous organization and management as it is happening to the nodes and the lines of the Internet.

With the international airplane network, passengers and goods are being transported with a big speed e.g. 720km/h (0,2km/s).

With the Internet, information is being transported with a speed of 300.000km/s.

The cost of using the airplane network is important and de-pended on the distance of transport.

The cost of using the Internet is very small and independent by the distance of transport.

The aforementioned Internet’s features and the important fea-ture that any PC, any computer of the network is a point of processing and circulation of information, lead to the conclu-sion that with this technology, we achieved the creation of an international “market of information”.

A market where all people have the same chances and the same means in the processing, disposal and transport of in-formation.

A market which is being developed without a central program-ming but instead with conditions of autonomy and of ideal de-mocracy.

The Internet has no proprietor and no governor. Proprietors and governors are the millions of people that possess and they

200

operate the three elements that it is being formed by: The nodes, the PCs and the telecommunications’ lines.

By comparing the possibilities of the interactive networks to those of the Mass Media we can easily understand the changes that are being made in the democratization.

Humanists, politicians, technocrats and simple citizens are called to utilize these big changes.

Towards this attempt the obligations of the technocrats are not the same with those of the simple citizens. They are greater because the technocrats apart from the obligation of the sim-ple citizen, they also have the professional task to contribute in such a way that the technology they developed and they serve, to be used only for the welfare of the humankind. They know more than the simple citizens about the possibilities and the weaknesses of this technology.

The perspectives

Two categories of lines are being used in the Internet for com-puters’ connections: The lines that connect the nodes and the lines that connect the PCs and the computers of the subscrib-ers with one node of the network.

The first are depicted in schema 16 like closed rings while the second like radiuses that begin from the nodes.

The first lines belong to the national and international network of the telecommunications’ companies, while the second to the subscriber network of them.

Today, in all telecommunications’ companies – or at least to majority of them – the international and national networks have been modernized and fully digitalized. On contrary, the subscriber networks (Local Lops) have not changed but they still have the analog form of the two copper wires.

This delay in modernizing is due to economic and technical fac-tors. That is, the replacement of the subscriber network is a

201

very difficult and very expensive work for contemporary tech-nology.

This delay constitutes the crucial problem in the operation of many major new services of a broad frequency spectrum: Broad Band Services.

Broad Band Services that are of interest to the simple citizen are: interactive television, that is transmitting and receiving TV programs, televised Telephony, color faxes and other services that require a broad band of frequencies such as telemedicine, electronic trade, banking services from home, tele-work, tele-action in general.

The delay in modernizing the subscriber networks constitutes a big problem in the full utilization of the interactive networks’ possibilities.

When this problem will be overcome then the interactive net-works’ possibilities will be take off. Then Mass Media will be replaced by the Medias of Interactive Informing. Then through one line that will end in our house we would be able to receive and to send any form of information.

The attempts to solve this problem are looking to the following directions:

1. To the construction of new subscriber networks by optical fibers. This solution presents many possibilities as well as high cost.

2. To the development of some appliances that could be placed at the ends of the existing subscriber lines and they would improve to a certain degree the performance of the subscriber lines. This solution presents limited possibilities but it is easy, fast and of low cost. It is the DSL technology (Data Access Subscriber Line) that is being advertised in newspapers and TV.

3. To the development of earthy wireless subscriber networks (Wireless Local Loop). This solution presents a wide flex-

202

ibility but it is limited due to the lack of frequencies. A giv-en total band of frequencies can be divided into few Tele-communication lines of broad band or into many lines of narrow band. In any case the product: “lines X bandwidth” is stable.

4. To the development of satellite systems with which the use of contemporary telecommunication’ networks will be completely bypassed; international, national and subscriber ones.

These attempts today have evolved into a battle. The “battle of wires” as it was called by a great scientist of informatics; the ever memorable Michalis Dertouzos.

Time will show when and how we will win this battle of wires. This battle’s victory will not be late to come.

A Colleague

In your introduction there is an exaggerated optimism about the abilities and the perspectives of the interactive networks. Is this optimism justified? You are not worried in case it turns out to be one more disappointment?


My optimism is based on the true fact that the interactive net-works’ technology:

a. It is a democratic technology as it was mentioned in our previous discussions.

b. It constitutes a tool for the reduction of social entropy. Do not forget that “entropy is the reciprocal of the informa-tion’s measure”.

A Colleague

If I understood well, you support that Internet will lead to the reduction of social entropy?

203


Not this exactly. I support that Internet technology is offering capability to men for reduction of social entropy; that it is a tool of social entropy reduction.

Still, in order that this can happen it is indispensable that the data that are circulating and processing in the Internet consti-tute information with the austere scientific meaning of the term and they will not be rubbish and lies.

However, the responsibility for the information’s quality belongs exclusively to the people and not to the Internet.

The Internet’s responsibility is the fast, flexible and low cost way of processing, disposing and circulating of information.

A Colleague

Since all the things we said are valid, I think that it would be more preferable in the new era to aim at the creation of a “so-ciety with low entropy” and not simply to the “society of infor-mation”.

What is your opinion?


I think that your proposal is of big interest. If we adopt it, we would have clarified from the beginning, from the title, that we have to aspire to the improvement of the quantity and the qual-ity of information and not only of the quantity.

A Colleague

I have the opinion this exactly what is being secured by tech-nology; more and better information. That is, information with better quantity and quality features. Isn’t that so?


No, it is not so.

204

Technology is responsible for securing all the features of infor-mation (quantity, processing, transmitting, disposal etc ), ex-cept from the quality.

Responsible for the information’s quality is always deep down man himself; even at the case of automatic collection and processing of information.

205


Subject: Democracy and digital technology


The influence of the new digital technology in important human activities –in research, education, public services, public securi-ty, medicine, production of services, production of goods, man-agement of businesses, functioning of political parties, function-ing of politicians – is obvious.

This influence we see it everyday when we enjoy the favorable changes created by new digital technology.

Still, the influence of new technology in democratic activities, in activities concerning the exercise of power by the citizens themselves, is non-existing.

In order to achieve this kind of changes the first presupposition is the existence of relevant institutions. The techno-economic possibility of implementing the institutions constitutes also a basic presupposition but in any case the second one.

The possibilities of new technology cannot by themselves create changes in the institutions of exercise of power by the citizens.

This is the reason of zero penetration of the new technology in that sector in comparison to the high penetration in other sec-tors.

Nonetheless, the interrelation of technology and power exercis-ing institutions is an existing fact, irrelevant by the kind of insti-tutions. It is a major problem which is being considered by many people as the most current and urgent problem of the new era that had begun. This is due to the fact, that the new technology can support effectively end equally demo-cratic and anti-democratic institutions.

Within the framework of these thoughts the following question arises:

206

Should the possibilities of the new technology be used for the exercise of power by the few –even if they are being elected by the citizens- or should they be used for the exercise of power also by the citizens themselves?

Is it intended and necessary to change the democratic institu-tions that have been created with the criterion of the possibili-ties of the past, towards the direction of increasing the citizens’ power and adjusting them to the possibilities of the new era?

Before we answer the above questions, each one of us should imagine the changes that can be brought forward by the new technology.

The changes

From our previous discussion it becomes obvious that the new digital technology of interactive networks –if also people ask for it- can change the way, the space, and the time of democrat-ic institutions’ functioning. It can achieve remarkable improve-ments in flexibility, in speed, in credibility and in the direct and indirect cost of these institutions’ functioning.

Obviously, the democratic institutions’ development and their adaptation to the possibilities of the new era are not technolo-gy’s act and responsibility. It is an act, a responsibility and a right of the citizens; of all citizens.

Despite that fact, new technology is influencing in an indirect way the institutions’ development. Institutions that were consi-dered to be rightful and desired could not be adopted until re-cently, because of arising exaggerating difficulties that were out of proportion and because of the big cost in their implementa-tion, today they can be adopted. Today, these problems are being faced very effectively with the use of the new technology.

The use of new technology in the democratic institutions’ func-tioning is difficult to be foreseen by now. The same thing hap-pened with the initial forecasting of Internet’s development. This forecasting always fails reality.

207

What can easily be foreseen is that any change in institutions will also be a lever of technology’s development. And vice ver-sa; any technology’s development will become a motivation element and a chance for further democratization of the institu-tions.

This interaction – if people also want it – can become a snow-ball that will lead to regeneration of Democracy.

But it is also possible – if people are indifferent – to lead to the death of Democracy. To lead to a belated “1984”43.

While being aware of this reality, we will attempt to present in a summarizing way, the changes in democratic institutions’ functioning which are awaited to take place in the new era.

Digital Pnyka

The space of democratic institutions’ functioning –the square with the balcony, the assembly room, the parliament, the elec-tion centers, the Pnyka - will be tremendously expanded. They will be expanded to the whole of earth and possibly outside of the earth. They will be identified with any space where digital machines of interactive information and tele-action are func-tioning, where computers, PCs, teleconference and televoting devices operate.

All these machines, they will be of private use because of their affordable cost. But they will also exist, similar machines of public use, something like today’s public phones.

The machines of public use will possess all the capabilities of the interactive networks and their way of functioning will be particularly user friendly. Such machines are already operated by the telecommunications’ enterprises in spaces that are called info-kiosks. Still, simple citizens have overcome the imagination

43 “1984” Orwell’s science fiction novel that was forecasting the domination of oligarchic political regimes through technology’s support.

208

of the telecommunications’ enterprises by creating the all known internet cafes.

Any country will have a digital Pnyka which citizens will “visit” in order to realize all those actions that the citizens of Athenian Democracy were realizing some 2300 years ago in the hill of Pnyka.

Pnyka is the name of a small hill in Athens lied opposite Acropo-lis and next to the observatory of our days. On this hill the citi-zens’ general assemblies were taking place. It was an open kind of parliament of the Athenian Democracy’s citizens.

Pnyka had a capacity of about 7000 citizens; it had a podium from where citizens–orators were speaking and clepsydras to count their time of speaking.

A digital Pnyka of nowadays will be an interactive network through which the citizens-visitors will be able to get informa-tion on the views of the other citizens, to make known their own views and to participate in the voting that will take place for decisions’ taking on the main citizens’ issues.

In a digital Pnyka the speeches of the citizens-orators, will take place from “digital podiums”; the networks’ sites.

Any orator will determine by himself his speeches’ program. In the same way any citizen will determine by himself his hearing program.

The autonomous and liberated character of these programs will be achieved through the use of machines –servants that will repeat the speech of an orator when a citizen-visitor of digital Pnyka asks for it.

The virtual space of digital Pnyka will be million times bigger than the natural space of the aforementioned hill. This space will include any city, any settlement, any place of the earth where it would be possible to operate a proper machine con-nected with the interactive network that we mentioned. Accor-

209

dingly, its capacity will be much bigger than the Athenians Pny-ka’s capacity.

Digital Pnyka will be constituted by a set of smaller extent in-teractive sub-networks; the municipal, prefectural, regional, national ones. All these networks will function according to the democratic principles of self-organization and self-management as Internet does.

The conclusions drawn out of the comparison between conven-tional and digital Pnyka are easy.

Digital time

In digital Pnyka there will be no limitations in the time of the speeches, of the meetings, of the voting.

There will only be one known time of duration for the specific democratic function which will be the same for all Pnyka’s visi-tors; orators and listeners.

Within the framework of this duration citizens will be able to visit digital Pnyka whenever it suits them; day and night. They will be able to stay in it for as much as they need in order to hear the views of other citizens and to make known their own.

All these will be easily and quickly done without significant cost because no transferring will be necessary and there will be no delays due to functioning problems to be faced.

Digital Isegoria

Basic aspirations in ancient Greece as well as pillars of democ-racy were considered to be the isonomia, isokratia and ise-goria. That is, democracy was provided for citizens: equality opposite the laws (isonomia), equality in the forming of the po-litical power (isokratia) and equality in the political speech that is equality in the speaking time of all citizens to the Ecclesia (isegoria).

210

From these three pillars, the most important was the one of isegoria because it was empowering inductively the standing of the other two pillars.

Isegoria in ancient Athens was ensured by Pnyka’s technical features – capacity, acoustics, natural air conditioning, number of podiums, clepsydras – and by the functioning rules of De-mos’ Ecclesia.

Isegoria in a digital Pnyka, will be ensured by its “Servers”. These Servers will arrange effectively and noiselessly that all the citizens’ speeches will have the same structure, for exam-ple: brief summary up to 100 or 1000 words and presentation of citizen’s thesis with no limitation, and so on.

It is obvious that in a digital Pnyka, isegoria can be ensured with easier, simpler and more reliable ways.

Now, the important element of the political speech is not the duration but the quality of it; the “features of the information” lead citizens to its positive assessment.

Digital informing

In the new era, citizens will get informed not by the Mass Media but by the Interactive Media.

The change in the Medias will bring a change in the form of information. Informing will evolve from its present passive form to the active form that it used to have 2300 years ago in Athe-nian Democracy.

In the new digital Pnyka each citizen-orator will support his speech with text, voice, video and data information and it will not have limitations.

The citizens-visitors of digital Pnyka will have easy, free and continuous access to all orators’ speeches.

The above changes clearly define the advantages of digital in-forming against the conventional one.

211

Digital informing of the new era will look like a big and modern market. It will differ by it in that it will provide information in-stead of material goods.

The big mass of information will oblige citizens to make as-sessments and to choose, the way they choose today material goods.

Still, the procedure of assessing and choosing information will be much easier than the one concerning material goods. It will be made without any transfers, no waste of energy and time, without the known problems that concern the research for ma-terial goods purchases.

It is obvious that the equivalent digital market of material goods, the electronic trade, will never acquire the advantages of the digital market of information. This difference is not a matter of technology but a matter of features of material goods and information. Information does not have weight nor gets it spoiled by time as it happens with material goods.

The research and assessment of the information market’s “products” will be done form our house or our nearby info kiosks and Internet cafes.

These procedures will be enabled by reasonable organization rules of the “information’s positions” and by information re-search machines.

However in any case, the responsibility of information’s’ re-search and assessment will belong typically and essentially to the citizens and not to the oligarchy of the Mass Medias that possess them in essence nowadays.

At the beginning there will arise difficulties as it happens to any transitional periods of changes. Still, familiarization and expe-rience will render the above procedures easy.

Digital tele-voting

Until today, voting for the choice of leaders (elections) or for the decision making (referendums) are being carried in many

212

ways: With shells, with round stones (votes), with lead stones (bullets), with legumes (broad beans) and with ballots.

In digital Pnyka voting will not use the above ways. It will be done through machines of digital technology, with no transfer-ring of the citizens to election centers. The votes and not the citizens - voters will travel to the election centers. And they will be traveling with a 300.000km/s speed rendering thus voting: easy, quick and with a very small direct and indirect cost. The capabilities of the Information Technology will also ensure vot-ing reliability.

We do not think that we can foresee accurately which will be the digital tele-voting systems that will be developed before proper institution will be legislated. However, with a first ap-proach we can imagine that tele-voting will take place through digital machines of private use –home and mobile PCs- as well as through tele-voting machines of public use. These machines of public use will look like the ATM’s that are being used today in banks for the transactions of their customers.

The control of the “voters’ book” will be done through the ma-chines with the help of a card with a personal number of the citizen’s identity (PIN) almost as it happens with the withdrawal of money from the ATMs of the banks.

It is very possible, if not certain, that there will be developed even more secure ways of controlling the voter’s book like the one of controlling our fingerprints or our voice.

The tele-voting systems will also be able to have other func-tions necessary in order to ensure the reliability and the safety of the elections’ procedure, for the publishing and the assess-ment of the elections’ result and for the informing of all citizens.

Under these presuppositions, tele-voting will take place with a speed much bigger than the contemporary one, increasing thus the citizens’ participation to the exercise of power.

213

Digital mentality

In the Mass Media and in the balcony passive citizens inform-ing, the procedures of the information assessing is much more of a sentimental character than it is of a reasonable one.

This is perfectly known by the people of the Mass Media and by the politicians. For that reason they make sure that they en-large the sentimental element and to minimize or to leave out all logical elements of information. They avoid “to talk about the cigarette-case”, as people use to say when the essential logical elements of an issue are not mentioned.

In the new era of the Interactive Media, alterations of the in-formation’s elements as well as of the information’s assessing are expected to happen.

Information will now have more reasonable than sentimental elements. The active participation of the citizens in informa-tion’s checking will have as a result the information’s structuring with reasonable elements that have to be simple, tangible and reliable.

Similar changes will also take place in the way of assessing the information. The assessing of information will also be done with more reasonable and less sentimental criteria.

This new mentality, into which logic will overrule sentiments, will constitute the digital mentality of the citizens.

A Colleague

Nonetheless, the depreciation of human sentiments does not constitute a depreciation of man’s humanity? of man’s human features?

Consequently, how is it possible to consider the digital mentality as a man’s improvement?

214


The answer to your question is obviously the answer to the fol-lowing question: Which feature of the man is the most impor-tant? his logic or his sentiments?

I recognize that even the question is not so simple. I think that most people believe that man’s most important feature is his logic. Sentiments and those that are compatible with the com-mon sense, come after logic.

Consequently, the view that the empowerment of logic opposite sentiments consist of a risk for the humanity, is a mistaken one. Possibly, it is also an intentionally mistaken view that is being methodically promoted for the protection of the interests of an established order.

It is not people who are in danger by the empower-ment of logic; it is the people of the established order who face the risk.

A Colleague

The changes you mentioned that can be brought by new tech-nology seem reasonable and feasible. Still, all those you de-scribed as digital - digital informing, digital isegoria, digital Pny-ka, digital market of information, digital mentality – mean a new machines’ domination against man.

As a result, is it possible that this machines’ domination to be the vision of the new era?

Is it possibly the nightmare of the new era?


At first, I agree with you that technology can become the vision or the nightmare of the new era. Still, this possibility will not be created by machines’ domination against man but by the bad use of machines by man. Demons and Angels do not exist in-side the machines; Demons and Angels exist inside the minds and the souls of human beings.

215

The exclusively responsible for the way to use the machines, is man and nobody else. The view concerning machines’ domina-tion on men is a cheap and absurd excuse for the bad use of technology. Man has and will have the ability to eliminate ma-chines’ domination by turning a switch; so easily and simply.

As far as it concerns now the terms “digital” and “information market” it is self-evident that their use – as well as the use of any other term - does not alter the essence of the problem. The term digital and market in other languages may remind only technology and commerce. Nonetheless, in Greek language these terms point to democratic procedures.

The words digit and vote – in Greek ψηφίο and ψήφος - are related to the exercise of power by the citizens. Furthermore, market – in Creek αγορά, agora - for the ancient Greeks meant general assembly of the citizens.

Consequently, these terms in Greece they were used to charac-terize democratic procedures since Homer’s years. They are not new ones.

However, it is possible that even the choice of these terms is not random. Maybe this happened because some new technol-ogy scientists know the meaning of these terms in ancient Greece.

216

Discussion of 4th July

Subject: The digitalization of Pnyka


The term digitalization is a term purely technical. It means the change, the substitution of a conventional technology system with a system of the new digital technology.

Such a digitalization took place in several technical systems. However, digitalization of bigger extent took place during the last two decades of the 20th century in the existing telecommu-nications’ systems where the term was used for the first time.

If Pnyka was in function today –if at least one Pnyka was in function- the term “digitalization of Pnyka” would only mean a technological change like the one happened to the telecommu-nications’ networks. Still, today Pnyka is not in function. Today, no Pnyka is in function all over the world.

As a result, the term “digitalization of Pnyka” does not imply just a technological change. It expresses mainly the regenera-tion of the values that existed and of the institutions that were functioning in the small hill of Pnyka in Athens.

The technical part of the digitalization is the easy one. The diffi-cult one is the regeneration of Pnyka’s values and democratic institutions, adjusted of course to the social, political and tech-nological givens of the 21st century.

The digitalization of the telecommunications’ networks that took place during the last two decades of the 20th century meant the beginning of the era of information. Still, the digitalization of Pnyka, that can possibly take place during the first decades of the 21st century will mean something even more important; the era of true democracy.

217

A Colleague

The technical part of Pnyka’s digitalization, for which we talked in our previous discussion, became understood.

That which was not understood is which it will finally be the form of regime that will be served by digital Pnyka? the de-mocracy of the ancient Greek spirit? the participating democra-cy of the Anglo-Saxon spirit? or the popular democracy of Marx-ism?


According to my perception, the perception of a simple citizen, the main and top goal of Pnyka’s regime, must be the devel-opment and the consolidation of the followings:

• To the citizens, the status of ruler and being ruled,

• To the leaders, the status of servant and deacon of the citizens’ power.

The above status is a mandatory characteristic of the political system of democracy, because people are being transformed to active and responsible citizens only when they get the status of ruler and being ruled.

The people, who get only the status of being ruled, could not be transformed to active and responsible citizens; they will be determinately transformed to passive and irresponsible ones. A regime with passive and irresponsible citizens can not be a de-mocracy.

The leaders of citizens that they have only the status of being ruled can not be transformed to servants of the citizens; they will be determinately transformed to princes or to ineffective democratic leaders.

A Colleague

All you say mean that pnyka’s regime must be the regime of the Athenian democracy. Isn’t it?

218

Colleague -Introducer

Not this exactly. I would like to say, that Pnyka’s regime must have the same orientation and the same principles with Athe-nian Democracy, adapted to the conditions of the 21st century.

For such orientation and adaptation, it useful to remind the fol-lowing difference in the development of Athenian and contem-porary democracies, because we think that they are useful to be taken into consideration in the planning of Pnykas’ regime.

• In ancient Greek democracy, the status of “ruler and being ruled” citizen, was in force, because the state was identified with the citizens.

• In the contemporary democracies, this status is not in force, because the state is being identified with the leaders independently by the way they are appointed. The claim that the leaders are servants of the people may have a moral value, but in essence only the recog-nition of the need to limit the state’s power in favor of the citizens has an actual value. This is the most impor-tant performance of contemporary democracies in comparison with the ancient Greek democracy one.

• In ancient Greek democracy citizens’ power was a self-evident fact, that its validity did not need an argumen-tation.

• In the contemporary democracies the poor citizens’ power was needed the philosophical argumentation of the Social Contracts of the English Hobbes, of the French Rousseau and many others.

• Ancient Greek democracy, without a philosophical ar-gumentation, was based on simple and crystal laws, of which the most important ones were those of Kles-thenes.

219

• Contemporary democracies with a plethora of philo-sophical argumentations are based on a plethora com-plex lows which need “translation” by experts lowers.

All above deep dawn mean that today we don’t believe and we don’t trust the principle “of citizen ruler”; we actually believe and trust the principle “of citizen ruler, but without ruling”!!

The main goal of the aforementioned reorientation must be the rational and effective participation of the citizens to the exercise of political power and the function of the leaders as servants of the citizens’ power.

If this could be achieved then it will not matter the name of Pnyka’s regime.

If this could not be achieved then the appeal of models and of names will be just nonsense; another trickery of the citizens by the political power established order.

A Colleague

Still, I did not understand which will be the political regime that will be served by digital Pnyka; the direct democracy of ancient Greece, the participating democracy of the Anglo-Saxon spirit or the popular democracy of the communist spirit?


You have right. Until now we have just mentioned the WHAT we expect by the political regime of the digital Pnyka; the re-gime where “citizens take by digital referendums the ma-jor decisions” concerning the citizens and the state. The HOW we will achieve this is a problem that can be faced within the framework of the constitution and of the subsequent laws.

Within this rationale, the definition of the form of digital Pnyka’s political regime is out of our capabilities as well as out of the purposes of our discussions. This definition can only be a work of experts and what is more of wise experts and not of simple citizens. However, simple citizens should understand and should approve the new limits of their power as well as of their re-

220

sponsibility. They have to experience the self-evident fact that the exercise of power is identified with the assuming of respon-sibilities. Exercise of power with no responsibilities is not power. It is a fake power; it is a mockery.

Consequently, the terms “participating”, “popular” or “direct” democracy that expresses a specific institutional framework, only when they clearly define the power of the simple citizen and his responsibilities can have a value for him.

In a digital Pnyka the crucial problem is who is going to choose the major problems for which the citizens will be taking the de-cisions by digital voting. Maybe this decision in practice is less crucial than the choice in question.

In ancient Pnyka the major issues for which the citizens were supposed to vote, were proposed by the leaders or the citizens; but were chosen by the total of citizens; by Ecclesia of Demos.

The same principle should also stand nowadays no matter how time consuming it seems to be.

If this principle will not stand and the citizens make decisions for issues that have been chosen by the leaders without their participation, then there is the danger that the digital Pnyka will evolve into a new super modern appeal of the political power established order. The fourth appeal.

Simply democracy

The names and the models of democracy are useful ideas for the politicians and the constitutional scientists that will need to modernize the institutions and to define the citizens’ participa-tion on the taking of big decisions.

Still, as far as a simple citizen is concerned all these are too many and unnecessary. Citizens can read again the next simple thought, phrased 2300 years ago by Pericles; an outstanding leader of the Athenian Democracy:

“Our political regime is not jealous of the laws of others. We ourselves are an example for the others. And because we do

221

not live based on the few but based on more, our political re-gime is called democracy. Laws give to everybody the same rights. And when we see that somebody is capable, we prefer him to take part in the public management. And even when somebody is poor is not held back because of his poverty, if he has something good to offer to the city” Epitaph, Thucydides 44

The ancient Greek term “democracy” is simple, brief and essen-tial. It does not need any changes. Institutions need changes so that the word democracy acquires again the meaning that it has in the Greek language.

The adjectives following democracy –direct, participating, popu-lar, etc- have no particular value. The problem is not in the names but in the institutions.

Our expectation by the digitalization of Pnyka is to have the citizens’ real power; what in Greek means actually the word democracy.

Globalization and Digital Pnyka

A Colleague

All these ideas in the framework of oncoming globalization can be realized?


My opinion is that the oncoming globalization is an opportunity and a lever for realizing all these ideas. This happens because the regime of a state is strongly modified by the regimes of the other states. In other words, for such a democracy to be devel-oped and operated in a state, it is necessary that similar re-gimes must exist in every country worldwide. In such a case, globalization will be a blessing for simple citizens.

44 Thucydides is a famous historian of ancient Greece ( 5thcentury BC).

222

In the opposite case, when globalization is realized in a world of regimes, typically democratic but in essence oligarchic, it be-comes a nightmare for simple citizens.

As a result, the oncoming globalization, make the devel-opment of Pnykas’ regime indispensable and urgent.

A Colleague

What we have said up to now is all right. But how it will actually change the present situation?

This change equals with the overturning of the established or-der and of the people’s established conceptions. How can such an overturning take place and how citizens can participate in essence to the exercise of power?

This can only happen through a revolution.


Indeed, only through a revolution; but through a revolution dif-ferent than the others. This can happen through a revolution that will aim at the overturning of an established order perception and not to an overturning of an established order of people.

A different revolution

In the energy conception of political power, all revolutions –or at least most of them- deep down there are a change of the point of power concentration and not a change of the concen-tration degree. The overturning of the established order deep down it means leaving it naked from any power. Still energy is imperishable. Consequently, it does not get destroyed by revo-lutions; it just “migrates” for another point of concentration.

However, systems with the same degree of power concentra-tion are in essence equivalent even if the points of concentra-tion get changed. What matters, is the degree and not the point of power concentration.

223

In revolutions, there is a need to make their power concentra-tion bigger than that of the established order. Otherwise there is no overturning; there is no successful revolution.

Nonetheless, the big power concentration of revolutions determinedly leads to the transformation of the revolu-tion into a new established order. There exist many exam-ples. We all know such examples.

The revolution that we, Elpida’s colleagues, envision will aim at the repatriation of power to its natural proprietors, to the citi-zens themselves.

Our struggle does not include as an “intermediate and tempo-rary goal” the power concentration to new moral and reliable people that in a second phase they will realize the repatriation of power to its natural proprietors. We believe that this repatri-ation may begin from today and be realized with slow and sure steps.

Our revolution brings to mind the fisherman that instead of giv-ing away his fish to his poor compatriots, he preferred to con-vince them to start fishing themselves.

We believe that in this way it is possible to achieve two impor-tant goals:

• To change today’s system of political power and

• To create a new system compatible with the moral and natural laws.

A Colleague

I agree with what you said. Still, I think that these constitute general thoughts of action. Could you tell us a simple and prac-tical way of action that would lead to the realization of all those that you mentioned?


According to my opinion, if the citizens want to assume the re-sponsibilities that are being created by the exercise of their

224

power, then all that we said will be realized by the politicians themselves fast and with no revolutions.

Politicians know very well that they are not “proprietors of power”. They know that the power that they possess at some time is the determinably non-transferable power of the citizens.

Those that deep down inside do not know or do not believe at this truth, are the simple citizens. That is the reason why they avoid to participate in the exercise of power and to assume the equivalent responsibilities.

In the case that this will would be created, politicians - and what is more today’s politicians that come from the citizens- have neither any serious reasons nor the practical ability to ig-nore the will of their voters.

Similar cases in the past were not ignored but they were satis-fied, without any revolutions, by leaders that did not come or they were not voted by the citizens.

Let us remember the 3rd of September in Greece. Then when Greek people went in the streets and they demanded a Consti-tution by a king that they did not choose themselves nor was he a Greek citizen.

Today, citizens will not need to go out in the streets to phrase their will for the digitalization of Pnyka. It is enough to send an e-mail or a letter to the First Citizen of the country with this demand of theirs.

If the majority of the citizens get this will, it is certain that poli-ticians will trace it and there will be not only willingness but also competition concerning those that will satisfy the demand. And this will happen because it is self-evident that the fulfill-ment of this demand will constitute a presupposition for a victo-ry in the forthcoming elections.

Still, citizens’ expectations for the elections do not include their participation to the exercise of power and the assuming of the equivalent responsibilities. Expectations become are limited to a

225

posting in the public services or to a personal favor by the rep-resentatives of their power.

You will think maybe that under such circumstances there will be no essential Pnyka’s digitalization but a digitalization aiming at a victory in the forthcoming elections.

Even if that is the case, digitalization would have begun.

Pnyka’s digitalization, in any case concerns firstly the soul and the mind of the citizens and then of the leaders.

There exist millions of hills on earth like the one of Pnyka. Still, true democracy took place only on this small hill of Pnyka in Athens. This particularity is not owed to the features of the hill but to the soul and mind of the Athenians. It is owed to the culture of the Spontaneous Democracy of Athenians. This his-torical fact transmits a clear and strong message to the people of the information society.

A Colleague

My proposal is to take the following complementary measures that in my opinion they constitute a simple and practical way of action like the one that our colleague asked for.

To acquire an e-mail address and a P.O. Box one, to which citi-zens could send their demand for the digitalization of Pnyka.

After that, some of us will bring with the use of a scanner the conventional letters to a digital form.

Now, as far as the citizens’ demands are concerned that they would all of them be in digital form, they will be send to the First Citizen of the country and we will place them in an Inter-net site so that everybody could take them; political parties, politicians and simple citizens.

In this site, apart from the detailed registration of the demands we will also create some statistic pages of the detailed de-mands that would follow.

226


It is a very good, simple and easy to be implemented idea.

Thank you colleague.

Any other suggestions?

A Colleague

I think that the previous procedure would be easier for the senders, more manageable for the receivers and faster for eve-rybody if we typified the text of the letters.

For example, here a typified text:

Declaration

The undersigned in the present……………………………………

Citizen of Telearea, by exercising the rights that are being defined by the Constitution of our country I declare that I want that the citizens’ representatives would promote the appropriate institutions for the re-inauguration and function of digital Pnyka adjusted to the contempo-rary social, political and technological givens.

I declare that the clarity and the quality of the program for the crea-tion of digital Pnyka will constitute a basic criterion concerning the choice of the political party that I will vote in the forthcoming elec-tions.

The declaring citizen


This suggestion is also simple, effective and can be easily im-plemented.

Colleagues, as you have understood, it is easy to find ways of making the citizens’ will public.

The problem is not the publication but the development of this will. The claims of some colleagues that this will exists, is not real. It is an excuse to avoid our responsibilities. If there was indeed this will, you should be sure that it would have

227

been traced by the politicians and that they would have already put in practice what is imposed by their interest.

For the development of this will is necessary that all those who believe in the idea of digital Pnyka should get more active. It is necessary to methodically inform our colleagues, our friends our co-citizens through the use of traditional and modern me-thods.

It is necessary to make conversations and to exchange views in the cafes, in restaurants, in our houses as well as through In-ternet or other communication Medias.

When such will would be developed to the citizens, then be sure that there would be more worthy to mention suggestions in order to support and to get publicized by people who have big experience in communication issues. From politicians and from Mass Media people.

229

EPILOGUE

With the discussion for the digitalization of Pnyka we completed the presentation of the Telearea young people’s views, of the Elpida’s friends’ views about democracy, technology and their interrelation.

We thought that it would be inappropriate and redundant to comment these views because our interest in publishing them shows that we consider them important and that we believe in the need and the purpose of their implementation. Besides, these ideas’ assessment would be of value if it was being done by the citizens themselves. Citizens are bored to listen to such analysis and assessments that are usually typified and ambi-guous.

Instead of commenting on them, we thought it would be useful to present a document relevant to the modernization of the institutions that took place in the Democracy of Telearea in the years 2005-2015.

In this document – an excerpt of the Telearean’s parliament minutes - there is mention of summarizing data about the re-forms that took place in order that citizens would have a ra-tional and essential participation in the exercise of political power; participation adjusted to the conditions of the new era.

In this document the following are being mentioned:

Excerpts of Minutes

Parliament of Teleareans

“During the period 2005-2015 the Parliament of Teleareans voted laws in order to ensure, the rational participation of citi-zens to the exercise of power and the extension of our democ-racy to a more direct form. A form oriented to the principles of the democracy that was born in ancient Greece and adjusted to the social, political and technological givens of the 21st century.

230

1. Definitions

(1) Participation of the citizens to the exercise of power is their participation to the taking of the “major decisions”. Other activities of the citizens irrelevantly to their value, they are not being considered as participation to power.

(2) The “major issues” for which the citizens decide are being defined by the citizens themselves or their parliament.

(3) The “major decisions” of the citizens are being taken through digital referendums.

(4) The decisions of the citizens on major issues are being tak-en with the simple, fortified and very fortified majority, ac-cording to their nature and their importance.

2. Levels of citizens’ participation

The participation of citizens in the taking of major decisions is being foreseen for all the levels where citizens have rights and responsibilities. These levels are the following three:

A level – low level

It includes the major decisions that concern:

The social security institutions, the syndicate and cooperative, the unions, the students’ communities and other institutions of citizens’ groups interests

B level – medium level

It includes the most important decisions of Municipality and Prefecture.

C level – top level

It includes the major decisions of the central power of the state.

3. Degree of citizens’ participation

The degree of citizens’ participation in the exercise of power is being reduced according to the increase of the citizens’ mass

231

that is entitled to participate in the taking of decisions. Partici-pation in A level is bigger than in level B which is bigger than the one in level C.

This climax aims to ensure:

(1) The effective and easy function of the participation’s insti-tution

(2) The increase of citizens’ power to the higher levels (B and C) in an indirect and inductive way, taken as a fact that there is an interdependence of democracy’s function in the three levels.

4. Frequency of referendums

Digital referendums for issues of the A level take place four times a year, one every trimester. For issues of the B level twice a year and for issues of the C level once a year.

In every referendum citizens decide for all the existing issues which were proved to belong to their jurisdiction.

The number of decisions through referendums , in average an-nual prices , was the following for the period 2005-2015:

Level of participation Number of referendums/year A, Low 12 B, Medium 3 C, Top 1 Total 16

5. Subjects of referendums

In the A level of participation

Referendums of this level concerned many categories of sub-jects which according to the frequency of their appearance are being classified as follows:

• Control of effective exercise of duties, of the state appointed executives of the above mentioned citizens’ institutions and

232

taking of decision concerning their approval, dismissal or send-ing to justice.

• Realization of strikes and sit-ins

• Approval of proposals of the aforementioned executives for the major institution issues.

• Control of effective exercise of duties of the elected repre-sentatives of the above said institutions and taking of decision concerning their possible dismissal or sending to justice.

In the B level.

• Choice of alternative programs and hierarchy its realization.

• Control of the elected representatives and executives for in-sufficient exercise of their duties and imposition of the fore-seen by the law penalties (dismissal – sending to justice).

• Promotion of basic infrastructure (administration of garbage, administration of pluvial waters –construction of small dams for storage of water)

• Organization and promotion of planters’ activities for the trade of their goods.

In the C level

• Institution of the control way of political responsibilities and imposition of “political penalties” through referendums (ex-tension of the law of ministers’ responsibility).

• Exclusive vocation and way of defining the wages of the dep-uties (approval of alternative parliament suggestions).

• Strategy for the fortification of competition (approval of alter-native parliament proposals).

• Choice and approval of alternative findings of assessment committee of the Telearean’s parliament and imposition of “political penalty”.

233

Through these institutions, the dogma that for so many years was being adopted in words by politicians, experts and simple citizens that “People are the rulers”, finally came to life.

The prime minister of Telearea – a relatively young man – dur-ing his days all these reformations were realized, he was called by the citizens as “the new Klesthenes”.

This funny and at the same time honorary nickname was the arduous and sincere expression of the Teleareans’ appreciation and satisfaction towards their fellow compatriot that helped in an effective way the timely and peaceful fulfillment of the ideas and aspirations of Elpida’s friends.

The reformations of “the new Klesthenes” helped in an effective way, to the repatriation of power to its natural carriers and consequently to the improvement of democracy’s quality.

Teleareans gradually passed from the era of representative democracy to the era of digital Pnyka’s democracy; to the era of digital referendums for the major decisions of A, B and C levels.

Only one digital referendum per year on the major is-sues of the state of Telearea was enough to be evolved the status of the “ruler and being ruled” citizen and to be improved significantly the quality of democracy.

Teleareans, participating in the taking of the state’s major de-cisions, became active and responsible citizens, in essence and in practice.

The active and responsible citizens of Telearea, understood bet-ter the values and the possibilities of life, and in a noiseless way, with no verbalisms, they preferred happiness than pros-perity.

235

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Political Power – Regimes

1. The Greek Constitution 1975/86 (in Greek)

2. Constitutional Law. By D. Tsatsos. A. Sakkoula 1982 (in Greek)

3. Direct Democracy or Representative Government. By J. Haskell. Westview Press 2001

4. Political Science. By A.D. Metaxas. A. Sakkoula 1979 (in Greek)

5. Athenian Democracy. By M. Sakellariou. University Pub-lication of Crete 2000 (in Greek)

6. The Origin of State. By Friedrich Engels. Translation in Greek. Mare and Korotzi, 1945

7. The Social Contract. By Jean Jacques Rousseau. Trans-lation in Greek. D. Papademitriou 1973

8. The Prince. By N. Machiavelli. Translation in Greek. Pa-takis Publications 2003

9. Democracy Matters. By Cornel West. The Penguin Press 2004

10. Platon. By Ulrich Von Wilamowitz. Translation in Greek. Kaktos Publications 2005

General Issue – New Era

11. What will be (How the New World of Information will change our Lives). By M. Dertouzos, A. Livanes 1998 (in Greek)

12. Telecommunications in Europe. By H. Ungerer. Transla-tion in Greek. EUC 1989

236

13. Telecommunications; controlled Freedom. By. M. Car-pentier – S. Farnoux – C. Garric. Translation in Greek. Kalofolias 1991

14. Spiritual Intelligence. By D. Zohar and I. Marshall. Translation in Greek. Esoptron 2001

15. Near to Man. By Erwin Schrodiger. Translation in Greek. P. Travlos – E. Kostaraki, 1996

16. The meaning of the things. By R. Freynman. Transla-tion in Greek. Katoptron Publications, 1998

17. “1984” By G. Orwell. Translation in Greek. Kaktos Publi-cations 1978

18. New Greek Language Lexicon. By G. Mpampiniotis. Vo-cabulary Center, 1998 (in Greek)

Physics – Technology

19. Random Noise Theory (Engineering Systems). By J. Bendart – J. Wiley and Sons, 1958

20. Statistic and Quantum Physics. K. Alexopoulos (Athens University 1957) (in Greek)

21. Physics, Electricity. K. Alexopoulos. Athens University 1955 (in Greek)

22. Physics, part A. By Holiday-Rensick. Translation in Greek. A. G. Pnevmatikos 1966

23. Special Theory of Relativity. By Albert Einstein. Transla-tion in Greek. Trochalia Publication 1998

24. What the Relativity theory is. By L. Landaou- G. Rou-mer. Translation in Greek. Korotzi Publication 1983

25. Aspects of Physics Theory. By M. Planck. Translation in Greek. P. Travlos 1999

26. ABC’s of Computers. By A. Lytel. Howard and Co 1966

237

27. Computer in simple words. By P. Makris. Personal 2000 (in Greek)

28. Reference Data for Radio Engineering. Howard & Co 1969

29. The History of Physics. By Emilio Serge. Translation in Greek. Diavlos 1997

30. The history of Communication. By G. Poretsianos 1980 (in Greek)

31. The History of Telecommunication Development in Greece. By P. Skandaras 1991 (in Greek)

32. La Fin des Certitudes. By Ilya Prigogine, translation in Greek, Katoptron 1997.

33. Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia in Internet.

Documents

Direct democracy in Telearea