mock democracy
“The Netherlands is a voter-cheating party dictatorship,” says Rients Hofstra. “The citizens vote, but in reality they have nothing to say. That must and can be done differently.”
The author from Almere sets in five political novels, among others, his Alternative polity (AS) apart. A system in which the 150 representatives of the people with a unique private program serve the voters instead of the political party they represent. Many recognize that the author's envisioned "plush revolution" could work in theory in practice, but fear that implementing it is a utopia. Hofstra is completely ignored by the establishment, because the AS chainsaws its chair legs.
Ido Dijkstra interviews Rients Hofstra for De Andere Krant (posted 30-04-2022)
Rients, you claim that we are not a democracy. Do we have voting rights?
“We are allowed to vote for party-slave career politicians once every four years. These party tigers conform to all party positions. Until parties pursue government participation. Then compromises have to be made. That means breaking election promises made in practice, in other words voter fraud! Making promises to power without consulting voters. Democratic? Parties also exclude each other because of the same power. Is that democratic?”
“The PVV is excluded by all parties. The SP and the VVD are mutually exclusive. FvD is not taken seriously and is often deprived of the floor in the House. Is that in the interest of the millions of voters who have given their votes to these parties? More and more people feel no longer represented, become disillusioned. As a result, they no longer vote. This now concerns millions. Is that democracy? The constitution was once undemocratic. Party political appointments are extremely undemocratic, but commonplace. We live in a sham democracy, a particracy. Thanks to all the compromises, the government regularly implements minority positions as majority decisions, with Brussels, among others, often co-deciding.”
Do you have examples of that?
“There are countless of them, including the corona idiocy. For two years, the cabinet imposed all kinds of dictatorial measures on the people, without participation, without being accountable. Or the referendum on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement (2016). A threshold of 300.000 signatures is raised for a referendum. Three quarters had already been determined from Brussels. The total package was incomprehensible to ordinary citizens. Many voters thought: 'The government is in favour: then I am against!' The government subsequently changed a few rules and approved it without a new referendum. Without a referendum, the referendum is abolished. Democratic?"
How will your Alternative Constitution do differently?
“After the AS system has been introduced, you vote for a representative with your own unique private program. That can largely correspond to a party program, supplemented with its own nuances, because not all candidates can agree with all party positions. Parties are not constitutionally necessary, but cannot be banned from a democratic point of view.
AS is stripping parties of power by ending party political appointments. Within AS, the parties are only given a supporting function, instead of an all-determining one. For example, voters arrive at a program that is closest to their own wishes through a number of competing voting guides. Every candidate who passes the electoral threshold receives a seat in the House of Representatives (idem for the municipal council and provincial councils) with a clearly defined mandate for four years, from which in principle there is no deviation (at most within the item at hand, in order to gain something anyway). to fetch.
Definitely not as an object of exchange with a completely different policy proposal). Expensive and therefore unfair campaigns full of empty election promises are becoming superfluous. Not persons, but programs are the stakes of elections. Coalition scheming for four boarded up years in backrooms is out of the question. For each political item, a representative can belong to a majority or a minority.
Program discipline is taking the place of the current strangling faction discipline at AS. Career politicians are making way for real people's representatives. If a new theme is placed on the agenda that is not described in the private programs - for example the installation of 5G - a binding mini-referendum per parliamentarian is held to the supporters. The pros and cons are endorsed across the House and go to all constituencies. Each constituency can then use a DigiD-like system to let them know what they want. This automatically creates more citizen involvement.”
Where do the ministers come from?
“Professional champs can apply or be approached. From a list of at least five people, the 150 members of the House of Representatives always choose the best one, free from parliamentary discipline. You then get party-independent toppers who are professionally in charge of the (top) officials in the relevant departments. If a minister does not do what the parliamentary majority wants, he/she must adjust the policy or resign. So the cabinet will not fall. There will be several state secretaries per department. In Education, for example, one for primary, secondary, university and one for alternative education. Elections are held once every four years on a fixed day because cabinets no longer fall. Ministers stay far from absurd election troubles. They provide much-needed continuity.
The Senate must no longer be a place for discarded career politicians. Senators must be appointed on the basis of law and knowledge. The Senate will assess laws for correctness, feasibility and whether they are not contradictory to existing laws, creating a Constitutional Court and art. 120 could disappear (the article that prohibits judges from checking new laws against the constitution). Meshes can also be repaired early.”
It sounds beautiful, but also very utopian.
“I often get this reaction: this is how it should be, but you can't make it. That's true if it's not widely picked up. That's why I invite everyone to anticipate and make AS known everywhere. Only then can it succeed. Until now, the mainstream media and all political parties are ignoring this system, because AS is putting the chainsaw at the seat of the political establishment. Utopia does not exist, but AS is feasible. Churchill once said, "Our democracy is not a good system, but I don't know any better." With AS there is. Even the trias politica will finally be reinstated independently of the party.
Representatives of the people (the legislature) are free from party dictates. Members of government (executive power) are appointed independently of the party. And judges (controlling power) must be appointed without partisanship. So separate from each other and not subject to the whims of the regentsque party elites. Where lobbyists now regularly approach only one minister in a manipulative manner, in the AS system they have to edit 76 MPs who cannot be edited because they have a commitment to their supporters. I invite everyone to measure the current system against the democratic yardstick and then the AS. In short, why should we be satisfied with a very meager three when a solid 7 is possible?”
Where will we be in 2029, after two elections?
“If this plush revolution gets off the ground, by 2029 we will have a better functioning democracy, more knowledgeable and fully transparent. If a new party (eg De 1e Demokritische Volks Beweging) or existing parties such as FvD, BBB, SP, and/or De Piraten with AS as spearhead score several parliamentary seats, other parties will have to follow under pressure from their voters.
AS gives (dissatisfied) voters perspectives again. Then Belgium follows and after that …!. I have the idealistic hope that AS will clean up politics. Because as it is now, we are heading for an unacceptable new world order.
“I do not rule out the possibility that we will then become part of the fourth German Reich with Brussels as the new Greater German capital, or even worse.”
Rients Hofstra
The book by Rients Hofstra "Roerig Balance" for sale here:
“Another book on politics? Anyone else who knows better? Yes, because in addition to strong criticism, Hofstra also comes up with innovative, revolutionary, perhaps even utopian ideas. And there is a need for this if we want to change the Netherlands: different and better!”
More from Rients Hofstra:
https://commonsensetv.nl/author/rients-hofstra/
Previously published books by Rients Hofstra:
.
Prof. dr. Bob de Wit wrote to me in the front of his book Society 4.0:
for Rients,
Hopeful on the way in the plush revolution to Society 4.0!
Ambassadors for AS:
Sjoerd Hania – Evolutionary
George van Houts – Theater maker, 9/11 expert and corona critic.
Niels Lunsing – Podcaster, journalist VVJ (Ver. Free Journalists)
Nienke Plantinga – Green and permaculture specialist
Charles de Recht – Founder DVO (Free Broadcasting)
Renate Tillema – Psychiatrist
Maarten Vasbinder – Arts, columnist DAK (The Other Newspaper)
More info: alternativestaatsbestel.nl
The 1st Democratic People's Movement 1dv.nl
