For most libertarians the thought of democracy is silly, as we understand that the majority are either ignorant of the negative effects of malum prohibitum legislation and importance of the protection of individual rights or that most people are more dedicated to their own self interests than to the social good, negating the potential of the majorities ability to enact quality legislation.

We have now seen, via two hundred years of history, that a Democratic Republic also has a number of fatal flaws, yet almost all, except anarcho capitalists, somehow still ascertain that democracy is the best form of government and that government is this god given necessity that we just can’t live civilly without.  It doesn’t work but it’s the best thing we have.  Obviously illogical since something that doesn’t work or has never worked, can’t be good or the best.

As proponents of free markets, we try to utilize those free market concepts in promoting solutions to social problems. However, the very system that we are trying to correct, often times maliciously thwarts these efforts, as those in positions of monetary, political and judicial power are surely looking out for their own self interests, as well. An example, politicians gain more power through taxation and the results are that we have ended up with over 114 different forms of taxation, often times layered with double taxation which is supposedly unconstitutional.

Democracy is simply, majority rule in a political context and it is really just a decision making system with various levels of plurality to effectuate the decision. In jury trials, involving a capital offence, we require an unanimous decision. For Constitutional Amendments we require a 2/3’s plurality and for the majority of issues we require a simple 50%+1 majority to be the so-called wiener.  Obviously, the higher the plurality, people seem to believe the results of the decision are better and there are some scientific studies that support that contention.   

The libertarians biggest problem in my opinion is that they have been unable to come up with a method to effectual change.  Fighting City Hall has so far been a losing battle since City Hall is better off being a fascist oligarchy and the majority cannot come up with a system to overcome that power, except by physical force which eventually plays back into the hands of those in power.

Surely it is a public opinion issue and why such ideologies as socialism and communism can be enacted into law without much objection, as it was in the twentieth century in America. 

If we are to succeed at effectuating lasting change, we are going to have to come up with a system that is better than the one we have, since swaying public opinion will not occur if people don’t see an advantage over the existing system…. just saying that the free hand of the market will handle it, is obviously not persuasive in the minds of most people.  

We have no choice therefore, in introducing an improved system that utilizes some elements of plurality decision making.  The questions therefore are: (1). Can we educate or are they already enough educated people to be able to create a better system?  (2). Would individual interests eventually corrupt the improved system in favor of the fascist oligarchy? 

For number (1)., I believe there are plenty of already educated people who could help create and  perfect a better system.   For number (2). I believe that if we utilize the right individuals, decentralize the system and have enough educated people involved, that we might be able create a better system that could sway public opinion.  Hopefully, the greater number of educated people involved in the system the less chance of corruption defeating its purpose. 

If we look at my proposed system as JUST(ice) the Road to a pure free market system, perhaps we can effectuate change prior to any corruption setting in.  

I have created a website so that those interested parties may get a better understanding of the type of system I’m proposing and why I think it just might work.  http://rsjexperiment.wordpress.com If nothing else, the computer program itself would be a useful tool in a number of other applications, so the money and adventure spent will not be wasted. 

You should know that I do not believe from both a systematic and historical reality that political activism can be successful and instead believe that judicial activism is the only potential means that can effectuate real change.  Pissing in the wind has just got us wet, discouraged and tired.  Urine is a great tool and has many uses, but not in politics.  Another site gives us some of the necessary tools for scraping it out in the courts that I think you will all find interesting.   http://www.toolsforjustice.com/?a_aid=4e8b15e2ecb1a&a_bid=f015d309