People and communities need to step up and take back responsibility #defundgovernment
1. Guiding principles for managing local resources based on a consumer-owner model that ensures that incentives of time, quality and budget are aligned.
2. National and state-level representation structure ensures your representative represents your communities concerns.
4. A risk mitigating structure of research and development.
5. A consumer owner approach to services and resources.
But... To make this happen, we must turn over the decades of shirking our responsibilities and outsourcing them to the slickest speaker every four years.
Local people know what is best for themselves and the resources they have access to. For governments to claim ownership of public resources and then use them against the local people should be criminal and is an overreach of political power.
Smallism helps people and communities work together and claim back the rights and responsibilities of local management from overbearing and unresponsive councils and local authorities.
If you are looking for a new system that puts power back in the hands of the people then Smallism is for you.
For more detailed information on Smallism principles and how to become a Smallism Qualified Service Manager (SQSM) please join us by registering.
Risk Management Model
Any financial advisor or trader will tell you to manage your risk. Put simply, you don't put all your eggs in one basket. Totalitarianism is precisely the opposite of risk management because all the eggs are in the basket of the leaders. If that leader makes a mistake, all the eggs are broken.
Smallism, by contrast, can be explained by the 'Coke Machine' problem. That is, would you rather have the revenue from 1% of 100 coke machines or 100% of 1 coke machine.
The advantage of the anti-totalitarian risk-managed solution is that it allows progress to be made. If you have a pandemic and allow 100 communities to come up with their solutions, then what works and what doesn't is easy to see. However, given a totalitarian model, there is no control group to know which solution would have been the best and can be drawn upon in the future should similar events arise.
Putting this example in the context of a topical issue, Pharmaceutical companies would invest in 10 different labs to arrive at ten different solutions. Each of these labs would be funded by a number of Pharmaceutical companies and the successful product's revenue would be shared.
Smallism is a structured approach to localism whereby local communities take control of their local resources and freeze out autocratic organizations that fail to provide the services and maintain the local population needs and wants.
This site's objectives are to educate people about the benefits of localism and to help communities organize their actions to take back control.
Communities need to understand that taking control also means taking more responsibility and Smallism trained Service managers are qualified to run community resources objectively and for the benefit of the local community - reporting directly to - the local community.
"Smallism [...] provide[s] the structure and processes around which this, and other libertarian philosophical concepts can be implemented."
The recent political environment in the west can only be described as dire. With so-called leaders seeming to do everything possible to destroy the white countries. The whole covid fiasco is being uncovered as deeply dishonest money-making and control orientated project tied into the globalist plans to subjugate the world, variously known as Agenda 21, Agenda 2020, The great reset, Build back better. All are propaganda terms to make you think the very, very wealthy care for you.
Well, we have news for you. They don't. They only care about what they can take from you. "You will own nothing and be happy".
What can the people do? Here is a good article that explains some of the steps we the people can take to help remove the power from those who would take power over us. Long read, but the readers of Smallism.org are used to that.
In-This-Together suggests using Agorism to take back control of our lives, our communities and wider humanity. This is very much how Smallism operates except that we at Smallism provide the structure and processes around which this, and other libertarian philosophical concepts can be implemented.
In other words, Smallism provides the practical framework for these ideas.
From Wiki - Agorism is a social philosophy that advocates creating a society in which all relations between people are voluntary exchanges by means of counter-economics, engaging with aspects of nonviolent revolution. It was first proposed by American libertarian philosopher Samuel Edward Konkin III (1947–2004) at two conferences, CounterCon I in October 1974 and CounterCon II in May 1975.
Featured Link of the day
If you have any questions about smallism please email admin at this site or you can contact us on twitter @smallismorg or parler @smallismorganization
Smallism starts with individual Rights
That “An individual has, at the heart of the system, the right to do whatever they wish in their own home, that does not infringe on the rights of anybody else to be left alone” is a fundamental precept of freedom on which Smallism is based, and it includes the right to protect property and life by any reasonable means.
The right to do whatever you wish, in your own home, that doesn't infringe on the rights of anybody else to be left alone.
Personal Privacy. We will look at ideas that imply a great deal of personal involvement in the local community and/or family. However, should someone want nothing to do with these in any way whatsoever; they have a minimum obligation to simply pay the annual bill and ask politely to be left alone. Binary choices such as personal privacy versus community involvement are essential in a heterogeneous society to ensure that ‘a place is found’ for everyone in the continuum of personality types within a society.
Indeed it is the lack of flexibility and intolerance to opposing views in current political-ideological debate, on both sides, that means there will always be an unhappy proportion of the population, whichever side is in power, and we see this demonstrated in the swings between left and right in current politics over the last one hundred years and the confusion of resulting left and right legislation and concepts.
What the social experiments of UK Labour, USSR, Burma, North Korea and China have taught us, is that people do not respond well to change enforced with the use of law by the few who have (quite naturally) a deep, human self-interest at heart and who use this power at the expense of those who find themselves trapped in the lower orders.
In the UK today these seem to be the Political Elite or possibly, according to some sources, an almost invisible, incredibly rich and powerful group, or groups, elite. Across the European continent, the ever more totalitarian European Union organization is centralising power at an alarming rate, and the Democrats in the USA are blurring the lines between the rule of law and ever more dictatorial mandates infringing on the US Constitution then ensures freedom for citizens.
Whichever it may be, a way has to be found to fix the implementation of the democratic principle. Centralized power-based systems simply put too much power in the hands of too few people.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.
John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton 1887
The logic of the left, which reads that oligarchy is bad (which Smallism agrees with) but that monopoly is good (which smallism by extension has to disagree with) is nonsensical. If putting power into too few hands results in bad outcomes (Cartels) then how can a monopoly provide a better outcome? The only answer is that the left has a delusion that those that seek power (ultimate power in a truly left-wing state) are incorruptible. This defies history.
Every single capitalist that has emerged from China and Russia started in government. Additionally, those that seek power tend to select pliant sub-commanders and as an organization becomes greater in size, be it a family, an overbearing state or a corporation (are all susceptible), the more power it wields, the greater the moral hazards and perverse incentives to abuse their position becomes.
Smallism creates society and culture change, not by legislating against specific (and quite natural, human) behaviours (as is the equality agenda) but by removing the incentives that create that behaviour in the first place, once again, by restricting the size of an organization and doing so by providing flexibility in competition, employment, taxation, raising capital, mobility and most importantly, by giving local resources to local people for which profit is made and traded with wards that provide that which a local area does not have.
By ensuring all residents have a recognizable responsibility and reward structure in their local community, through shared ownership in local resources in a direct, measurable and specific way, Smallism encourages good and cooperative behaviour.
While talk of community in this way might sound a little like the communes of Mao, bear with me; in implementation, Smallism is most certainly free market.
One of the greatest delusions in the world is the hope that the evils in this world are to be cured by legislation Thomas Brackett Reed In order to change the people, you have to change the environment they grow into, as the council ‘sink’ estates from the 1950s on have demonstrated.
In many ways, Smallism reverses the concepts of the sink estate social housing paradigm.
Homogeneous or Heterogeneous Humans? One of the interesting conundrums of the left-wing desire to create a homogeneous human race is the ignoring of the power of the environment on human development.
In order for the human race to be homogeneous, its environment must also be. This implies that the left-wingers must alter nature to create a standard, global environment in order to change the people. Which of course is exactly what intranational bodies such as the World Economic Forum, World Health Organization and many other less know institutions are trying to achieve.
Suppose that they did achieve this goal, by way of example, as soon as the race finds a new planet to colonize the effects of evolution will be seen over two or three generations as their physiology and culture is determined by distance from central command and local environment vs survival needs. Therefore, there is no possible way the left-wing desire for a homogeneous can be achieved over the long run, as nature tends to evolve.
To fight evolution is to fight nature. A force that has been around a lot longer than the human race, let alone cultural Marxism. Human self-interest should be celebrated as a natural human talent that Smallism exploits to create a peaceful and cooperative society by allowing true social mobility, variability, sharing, trading and education, rather than suppressing dissenters, as other regimes are bound to do when ideology fails.
Smallism has a dualistic nature that always presents a choice for all personalities in society. To achieve these goals we need to change our perspectives on who owns what and what can be done with that resource. This requires us to first understand that 'public ownership' is not the same as 'government ownership'
Overview of Transitioning to Smallism
Once understood, the actual transition will mean very little day-to-day change for individuals. After all, Smallism isn't a revolution of society, it's society taking back the ownership and responsibility that rightfully belongs to the community.
In the same way that all FTSE100 companies have made the transition from Silo departmental thinking to Process-based Management using such methodologies as the ISO9000 family of products, Information Technology Infrastructure Library, or PRINCE2 project management a country can achieve the same change.
Transition Project Implementation Training will have to be developed for those following a career as a Ward Manager and then subsequent specializations that will develop as the position becomes more efficient.
Stage 1 Wards Start taking responsibility for simple services
Ward Using the existing wards as a starting point, communities will be encouraged to hold planning meetings to understand how the system works and decide how they wish their Ward to be managed. At this stage, the boundaries of wards may change by agreement of a property owner and the Ward they wish to join.
Efficiency for both Utilities and Ward Managers is ensured by giving the investors in the area the ability to tender to all providers without infrastructure restriction and the ability to simply sack and replace an under-performing Ward Manager.
Stage 2 Greater responsibility with bigger service projects and collaboration with neighbours
Returning infrastructures to the people Utility infrastructures, such as electricity and water, will be sold to the ward in whose property they reside. This will provide utility companies with a huge inflow of cash which can be used to buy back shares on the legacy markets so that they can eventually be listed locally when investment is required and prepare for their operations as a customer-focused organization. Should a ward be unable to fund a direct purchase during the transition phase there are many ways businesses deal with this such as leaseback arrangements while the ward begins to get their financial state in order.
Stage 3 Infrastructure Maintenance
The maintenance contract is then put out to a service provider selected. Companies bid for the contracts and agree on service levels with Ward Manager who is working on service quality and budget as agreed by the ward.