About the ISS

Do you ever think about how nations like Canada and the United States of America are governed? Have you pondered the source of the laws underlying this governance? Allowed yourself to consider whether you are satisfied with being under it, when your limited political choices don’t truly allow you to participate in creating those laws?

The ISS was formed by and for those who no longer view Canada’s (and many other nations’) present system of governance as ‘democracy’ and are willing to take on the responsibility of self-governance and explore how to provide for its implementation.

The main difference between the Crown that governs in Canada and the Interactive Sovereign Society (ISS), as alternate sources of law (to which one may choose to consensually be held to adhere, as illustrated in the flowchart here) is as follows. The Crown, whose Charter claims that its governance is founded upon principles that recognize “the supremacy of God”, asks you to believe in “God” as the source of your law. And yet legislation in Canada today is left to the whims of politicians viewed as corrupt by increasing numbers of citizens (eg., the “Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act” aka Bill C-38 passed by the Conservative government in 2012 and which the newly elected Liberal government has done nothing to remedy the unfairness caused by).

The Constitution of the Interactive Sovereign Society, on the other hand, states that it is founded upon the principle of sovereignty of the individual, thus asking you to believe in yourself. This is not to say that people should not adhere to laws. Far from it. The ISS has a Charter and Principles that serves as the basis for members to collectively develop and respect a set of principles of lawful conduct.

The US Declaration of Independence states “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.” Does a nation founded upon these principles have the right to impose a form of governance upon ISS members that they do not consent to?

The ISS “lays its foundation on such principles and organizes its powers in such form” in the general absence of a “leader” because the ISS uses an interactive electoral system, which to a great extent means less hierarchical authority. Reducing authoritative powers wielded by officials is an emerging state of social consciousness and a stage of evolution in society. The interactive electoral system lets members choose who facilitates the creation of laws whenever they are ready to do so, instead of periodically, as in the case of electoral systems used by the Crown and the US government. Use of a periodic electoral system in what purports to be a free and democratic society is a contradiction.

The ISS Charter and Summation of Principles were created under the agreement made between the people who choose the ISS Constitution as a free and democratic source of law to share. The ISS Summation of Principles is a list of the principles that ISS members must agree to uphold as a condition of membership. These are principles that help us treat each other the way we enjoy being treated. The result is that members get laws they are proud of. And that each member is respected. By everyone.

The time is now

World governments are using the word ‘austerity’ to try to tell us there’s not enough to go around. Do you believe there’s not enough to go around? There is a growing number of people in the world who believe that the economic infrastructure (that is coming close to enveloping all of human civilization) has not only created great inequality but that it is inherently unstable and its collapse would mean disastrous consequences for human beings in huge numbers. It is believed that the oligarchy in control of many governments of the world is either ill equipped or else does not even intend to remedy this instability and that the people have no choice but to find alternate remedy.

Have you heard of the term ‘murmuration’? Literally it refers to behaviours seen in other living species, such as how a large flock of birds will all turn in the sky at the same instant without any apparent communication. Human science doesn’t yet know how this is done, as it seems to be some kind of collective cognitive processing that is to-date beyond our understanding. Some are now using murmuration to describe the way that rapid changes are occurring in human activities worldwide, such as the political protests and upheavals of very recent times. ISS members, like many others, are soaring with the current murmuration in hopes that it will lead to momentous changes in geopolitical and economic life. Join us.

Recent Posts

Our entry into the Global Challenges Prize 2017

We are extremely happy to tell you that we are entering a version of the Interactive Electoral System into the Global Challenges Prize 2017: A New Shape — Remodelling Global Cooperation. This competition will award US$5 million in prizes for the best new models that re-envision global governance. The Global Challenges Foundation was founded in 2012 by Swedish financial analyst and author Laszlo Szombatfalvy because he recognized that the impacts of the world’s current major challenges — especially climate change, large-scale environmental degradation, violent conflict, extreme poverty and continued rapid population growth — are being seriously underestimated by political and business leaders who too often instead focus on short term interests. So, the goal of the competition is “to incite deeper understanding of the most pressing global risks to humanity and to catalyse new ways of tackling them”.

Did someone say re-envision governance!? No problem, we’re on it! The proposal we are entering has us busy scaling up the IES since the original version was conceived as a solution to a perceived violation of constitutionally guaranteed rights in Canada. Namely, while Section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says Canadians have “the right to vote in an election of members of a legislative assembly”, the fact is that periodic elections leave long stretches of time where voters have no way to exercise this right. Consequently, they have no means of switching their vote if (or, sadly, ‘when’ is perhaps more apropos here) the representatives they formerly chose end up failing to keep their commitments or make choices counter to the voter’s values. (Excitingly, our members have agreed that, in the event we win the Prize, some of the money awarded will be devoted to going to court regarding this Charter violation.)

For those unfamiliar, the Interactive Sovereign Society (ISS) was founded in 2010 to test out the IES. For six years now ISS members (which today include US citizens) have functionally exercised major changes to contemporary democratic practice. First, elections are not periodic (hence are ‘aperiodic’), allowing every individual to change their vote at any time.

Critics of this system usually argue that any such electoral process would suffer instability and fall prey to mob rule. However, the ISS has developed unique practices to ensure stable governance in ways superior to the prevalent techniques of manufacturing majorities. These include measures that provide extremely smooth transition between candidates. What has resulted is that in times of crises or during proliferation of new beliefs through the electorate there may in some cases be a swift progression of elected officials but during times of relative agreement an incumbent’s tenure may be prolonged extensively. The continuous nature of the aperiodic system ensures representatives are always accountable to their electors.

But an aperiodic electoral process is only one aspect of an Interactive Electoral System. This system also reeducates citizens on the key concepts that are fundamental to true democracy and justice: what is sovereignty, and how are consent and authority employed and recognized or usurped? Voters using the IES become conscientious that it is citizens’ consenting to be governed that provides elected representatives the authority to govern. Thus voters using this system do not presume that a majority is morally justified in imposing decisions on minorities.

Further, our submission argues that conventional modern political paradigms are ostensibly sovereign-states that grant the authority to govern to representatives chosen by the people. This decouples the power of sovereignty from the will of the people, and can see those representatives handed the ability to ‘rule with absolution’ whereby they seemingly have the ‘right’ to take decisions and actions simply “because they are the government”. This abstraction is how the world has seen purportedly democratic governments taking actions counter to public sentiment or that could arguably be described as objectively immoral. The ISS has proven that when we instead acknowledge that it is not the state that is sovereign but the people, then the will of the people cannot be overruled by state representatives with self-serving agendas.

Stay tuned for more about our entry into the Global Challenges Prize competition!

  1. Prime Representative Elect Leave a reply
  2. Seeking a lawyer Leave a reply
  3. Statement From New ISS Prime Representative 1 Reply
  4. The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) does not respect section 3 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Leave a reply
  5. The previous Prime Representative of the ISS intends to have the present Prime Rep brought before a judicial panel for conduct that is inconsistent with our society’s principles. Leave a reply
  6. What the Supreme Court of Canada Says Leave a reply
  7. Statement From Fifth Prime Representative 2 Replies
  8. Two Mistakes In Court 1 Reply
  9. Crown applies to have case dismissed, hearing on Fri. 17 Oct. Leave a reply