Council of the Wise

|  This resource includes primary and/or secondary research. Learn more about original research at Wikiversity.

|

This article by S. Perquin discusses a proposed government structure that includes a higher governing body, the Council of the Wise. This council, composed of well-intentioned and wise individuals, would discuss complex issues beyond the capabilities of the regular parliament. The system includes three parts: a jury to select council candidates, the council itself to deliberate and make decisions, and the people to oversee and impeach council members if necessary. This approach aims to enhance democratic decision-making with combining democracy and wisdom-based governance.

## Introduction

[edit | edit source]

As a Dutch citizen, I live in a representative parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy. I often see our leaders making decisions and considerations that I believe are mistaken. In my view, the democracy is not functioning effectively in its current form. I have identified the following issues in our current form of government:

* In politics, I often see that there are election promises made before elections. Based on what political parties and politicians claim they will do, people are expected to vote for them. This is problematic in many ways.
* Political parties and politicians can make promises that they know they will never be able to fulfill. These promises can be unrealistic and unattainable.
* Political parties and politicians can make promises that they are not actually in favor of, hoping that their positions will attract voters to their party. They may have no intention of achieving these so-called ideals at all.
* After the elections, political parties must collaborate, and some parties may easily abandon their positions in order to be part of the government. It then seems as though they adopt the ideals of other parties. As a result, their voting behavior in parliament may not align with their true principles, but is in the interest of other parties.
* The fact that every Dutch citizen over the age of 18 is allowed to vote also brings some issues.
* People may vote for politicians simply because they find their personality or appearance appealing. In such cases, it's not about their opinions but rather the person themselves. It should be about a person's positions and not whether someone is attractive or nice.
* People can vote for politicians with malicious intentions without realizing it. You never know the underlying motives politicians may have behind their positions, so you can never be certain if you're voting for someone with bad intentions. Voting thus an in effect taking a gamble, hoping you guess right.
* Also, something else—certainly not unimportant—the royal family appears to have a considerable amount of influence on decision-making in the Netherlands and beyond. For example, they attend meetings of the World Economic Forum,[1] and our queen is even a member of the United Nations.[2] Additionally, a significant amount of money goes to the royal family—56 million euros per year![3] Furthermore, the king receives an allowance from the state (on which he does not have to pay income or earnings tax),[4] and renovations of palaces are also funded by the state.[5] Since these royal family members are not elected and the monarchy seems outdated and obsolete, I believe the best decision would be to abolish the monarchy. As far as I'm concerned, the current heir to the throne can be our last queen, since she has been raised for this purpose her entire life. The law should state that her children are no longer entitled to the throne. A ceremonial monarchy could offer a solution, but even under a ceremonial monarchy, the royal family would likely still exert considerable influence on (inter)national political affairs. Abolishing the monarchy, in my view, is therefore the only solution to prevent them from still exerting influence through succession to the throne.

## My ideal form of government

[edit | edit source]

A conceptual logo A conceptual meeting room of the Council of the Wise

In my opinion, the best form of government is one where, in addition to a representative parliamentary democracy, there is a higher body that makes decisions on the most complex issues that the regular parliament cannot resolve. This higher governing body, the Council of the Wise, consists of a small group of the most well-intentioned and wise individuals in the state—who can think deeply and comprehensively about complex issues while considering the opinions of society. The Council of the Wise is purely a higher governing body that deals with issues where the regular parliament cannot reach a consensus—such as ethical dilemmas that have been ongoing for years and need decisive resolutions—so it's really an addition to the existing parliament. Such sophodemocracy—a combination of a democracy and a sophocracy—would be the ideal state. However, this does raise the question: who determines when an indidual is well-intentioned and wise? I have some thoughts on that. The governing body would consist of three parts: the jury, the council and the people.

### The jury

[edit | edit source]

First, a jury must be selected with people who have a wide range of knowledge and experiences, who will ultimately select the candidates for the Council of the Wise. Everyone can register and apply for this jury. The candidates have to create a profile and answer a series of standard questions formulated by the existing parliament, such as:

* How do you look upon life?
* What are your convictions and how are these formed?
* What are your political ideals and how are these formed?
* What is your relationship with your parents and family?
* How did this relationship come to be?
* What are you proud of?
* What do you regret in your life?

The intention is for them to provide an answer under each question (if they do not want to answer a question, they can explain why). In this way, candidates are tested on their ability to reflect deeply on themselves and understand why they are shaped the way they are. Also, this is the only way to determine if someone has good intentions for serving the country. Transparency is extremely important in the process. Once jury candidates have answered the questions, they can participate in dialogues on an open discussion platform that will be set up on the internet. Anyone with an account can ask questions. Questions can be asked about both professional and personal life. This is important because the integrity of the candidates must be carefully considered. After people have had the opportunity to question the candidates, the voting process can begin. Through the platform, each person can vote for a candidate they would like to see as a jury member. Once the voting period has closed, the votes are counted, and the jury members are elected. A total of 100 members will be selected.

### The council

[edit | edit source]

Then, individuals who desire to be part of the Council of the Wise should send a letter of application that everyone on the platform can view and read. These individuals, who believe they can be part of the Council of the Wise to lead the country, will ultimately be elected by the jury (which has been elected by the people). The people who want to be part of the Council of the Wise must be able to prove several things, including:

1. that they can make a significant contribution to philosophy
2. that they have no strong, biased opinions
3. that they have an open mind and are open to all new insights, ideas and visions
4. that they are capable of changing their opinions
5. that they are not influenced by external factors, such as political parties, governments or organizations

They can do this through jury hearings. Just like in talent shows, there are preliminary rounds, subsequent rounds and finals. In front of the jury, the candidates can then explain who they are, what they want to achieve and why they are suitable to be part of the Council of the Wise. After the candidates have given their speeches, the voting takes place. Out of the 100 jury members, at least 51 members must vote in favor for the candidate to advance to the next round. This applies to all candidates. By continuously organizing new rounds, 25 council candidates will eventually emerge. Once these 25 members have been appointed as Wise Councilors, the debates on societal issues can begin. Both initiatives from the lower parliament and from the people can be placed on the agenda. The Wise Councilors will deliberate on these issues. Together with the citizens, the jury controls the rulers.

### The people

[edit | edit source]

If certain rulers fail to meet any of the membership requirements and have misrepresented themselves, they can be removed from their positions via an impeachment process. This can only be done by the people. The jury has influence on the appointing the Wise Councilors, while the people have influence on impeaching them. Every three years, the people can elect a new jury. If people are satisfied with certain jury members, they may remain in their positions, while jury members whom people are dissatisfied with will be replaced.

## References

[edit | edit source]

1. ↑ "Wat doen koningin Máxima en koningin Mathilde samen in Zwitserland?". Blauw Bloed (in Dutch). January 18, 2014.
2. ↑ "Inclusieve financiering voor ontwikkeling". Het Koninklijk Huis (in Dutch).
3. ↑ "Begroting van de Koning". Het Koninklijk Huis (in Dutch).
4. ↑ "Betaalt de Koning belasting?". Het Koninklijk Huis (in Dutch).
5. ↑ Susanne Geuze & Merijn Rengers (October 4, 2014). "Renovatie paleizen kost de staat ruim 127 miljoen euro". de Volkskrant (in Dutch).