Manifesto 2026

“Fuzzy Democracy” was originally conceived in 2012 as a way of making every vote count by using technology which was not previously available. How that works is dealt with repeatedly elsewhere on this website. Briefly, it involves the independent recycling of votes by less successful candidates.

Some critics have objected to the word “fuzzy.” But all that “fuzzy” indicates here is that this system, like every other, being an approximation, is imperfect. However, it is good enough and better than any rivals. Strictly speaking (pedantically), it is not all votes that count but almost all, depending on various parameters. Any shortfall is negligeable. “Democracy” means that, as one check & balance among others, there is voting. The precondition for this is a liberal dispensation, which consists in the rule of law, property rights, markets and freedom of speech.

“Fuzzy Democracy” was joined by an earlier concept, published in 2001, for which I only found a good expression much later: Thematic Devolution. Again, this is explained amply elsewhere on the website.

In the years following 2020 the need has emerged for a further component: Deselection by universal suffrage. This may be even more vital to a genuine democracy than election. The target is non-elected officials in public office, such as judges and heads of police, whose decisions and conduct have cast doubt on their character and judgement, i.e. on their loyalty to a liberal dispensation based on the rule of law and property rights.

Meanwhile, an ancient component has come to prominence after long neglect: the power of juries to nullify statutory law. “Fuzzy Democracy” borrows this concept from those who have investigated and revived it. Again, it is explained elsewhere on this website. There it is also argued that the traditional power of juries should be enhanced so as to reign in lawyers who have indulged in overreach.

None of these four components is feasible without drastic reform of the financing of the mass media and scrutiny of those earning money from journalism, i.e. with the possibility of deselection of rogue professionals. Proposed mechanisms for this are a work in progress, with the need to tread carefully and not imperil freedom of speech. The work-in-progress is also on the website.

Here is a summary as befits a Manifesto: We need:

1. Independent and transparent recycling of votes cast for less successful candidates by these candidates

2. Thematic devolution

3. Proposal for deselection by universal suffrage of persons in public office whose record has given rise to widespread outrage.

4. Reinforcement of the right of juries to nullify statutory law and enhancement of the scope of their powers

5. Radical reform of the mass media