Ballot Wording Changes
Changes in the ballot wording:
Like most political projects, this one evolved over time near the beginning. Originally (as presented in the companion book, Rescue Plan for Planet Earth) the ballot wording was this:
Do you support the creation of a directly-elected, representative and democratic world government?
People assumed that we meant to create a world government where there was none at present. It was later realized that to a huge extent, we already have world government in the WTO, the WMF, the World Bank, the ICC and the UN (and in some respects and at some times, the government of the USA acts as if it were a world government). What we don’t have is world democracy, and the key, missing ingredient is an accountable world parliament. After much debate in 2009, the Board agreed unanimously to change the name of the organization from Vote World Government to Vote World Parliament, and to revise the ballot wording to read:
Do you support the creation of a directly-elected, representative and democratic world parliament that is authorized to legislate on global issues?
[NOTE 1: This was done at a time when the total vote count was in the neighbourhood of 17,000 votes, and we considered whether we needed to re-start the overall vote count in light of the change in the ballot wording. Since a parliament is part of a government, and a democratic government must include an accountable parliament, it was decided that we did not have to restart the ballot count. Obviously, had the change been the reverse, from a “parliament” to a “government,” the verdict would have been different.]
Chapter 5 of Rescue Plan is about transparency at the new world body. The one argument that is used against the world democracy (aka the mundialist or world citizen) movement which has serious merit is the accusation that any world government would “inevitably” degenerate into world tyranny at some point in the future. Since transparency is the only known antidote for corruption, it was very strongly recommended (indeed insisted upon) in Rescue Plan that a regime of total transparency become an integral and sacrosanct part of the operating procedures of the new world body. In 2011, we were asked why we did not include that word, “transparent,” in the list of key adjectives describing what people were being asked to vote on in the global referendum. We realized it had probably been a mistake to not include that word from the beginning, and after the Board considered the matter, it was decided (the decision was unanimous) to include that words now. Thus, in March of 2011, the ballot wording was altered to read:
Do you support the creation of a directly-elected, representative, transparent, and democratic world parliament that is authorized to legislate on global issues?
[NOTE 2: Again, we faced a question of whether the vote count in the global referendum should be re-started at zero. After ample discussion, the Board decided unanimously that since the concept of total transparency was emphasized in Rescue Plan and was presented and considered non-negotiable since the very beginning of the project, inserting the word “transparent” was not a change in the concept at all, but rather a clarification, and thus we were not obliged to restart the vote count at zero (which by this time was somewhat more than 21,000).]
[NOTE 3: The percentage of “yes” votes has been around 95% since the beginning of the project, and was not altered at all by either of these changes in the ballot wording. Also, if it is raised as an issue later, at a time when we have millions of votes, for instance, it will be a simple matter to delete the first 21,000 ballots and not affect the overall situation. It should also be noted that in these early days, before the referendum has gone viral, there is far more interest in our project by those who support world democracy than from those who oppose it. Once the global referendum has become well known, the true final tally is expected to be in the region of 70% in favour, 30% opposed, although that involves some guesswork. And it should be remembered that our definition of a global mandate that has the force and effect or world law requires that at least half of all human adults have voted and a minimum of 67% of all those votes are in the “yes” column. (See Chapters 10 and 11 of Rescue Plan for the rationale behind these numbers.)]