On Communism:Page31

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 5: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY -- WELFARE 

3. People enjoy comfortable and complete care system.

3.1. Public long-term care

The advanced capitalist society almost overlaps with the longevity society. However, a long-lived society is also a society in which the number of elderly people requiring nursing care increases and the burden of nursing care is placed on society. On the other hand, it is not possible for a small nuclear family with limited manpower to take on all nursing responsibilities.

Therefore, by commercializing nursing care, capitalism moves in the direction of entrusting nursing care services to highly profitable nursing care providers. As a result, the benefits of long-term care services become a beneficiary-pays burden, and long-term care labor becomes highly exploitative and dense.

Contrary to such a direction, communism will establish nursing care as a public service while building a nursing care system that responds flexibly to needs. Specifically, the home care system will be highly enhanced, but "at home" is not limited to the literal home. Numerous public housing with public care will be prepared for the elderly, where caregivers and nurses will be stationed, and it will be possible to move in at any time for free.

By expanding the concept of "at home" in this way, a home care system based on advanced mutual assistance will be constructed, eliminating the need for typical facility care such as traditional nursing homes. As a result, categorization such as at-home or facility becomes relative.

3.2. Integration of nursing care and medical care

The front line of communist nursing care is handled at the commune level, which is the base of life-related administration, unlike regional medical care. Specifically, a public care station will be set up in each district of the commune. In addition to home helpers, home-visit nurses and doctors who specialize in geriatric medicine are stationed here, making it possible to fuse nursing care and medical care.

Individuals who wish to receive nursing care can select their desired care programs based on the doctor's accurate diagnosis and advice. This nursing care station operates 24 hours a day, and even at night it is possible to request the dispatch of helpers and nurses as needed. In addition, it will be a one-stop type with an outpatient daycare function that meets the needs of the individual and his/her family.

On the other hand, atients with multiple illnesses requiring full-time nursing care or patients with advanced dementia who are difficult to care for can be admitted to a hospital-type public long-term sanatorium free of charge.

Furthermore, although the provision of unique services by private nursing care volunteer organizations that cannot be covered by public services is not excluded, they will also be registered with the commune and subject to public supervision.

3.3. Retirement model for couples

As the number of elderly people living alone increases as a result of nuclear families, it is likely that some people will say that a completely universal nursing care system  is an unrealistic dream. Therefore, in recent years, in response to the rising rate of non-marriage, a self-contained retirement model for elder singles is sometimes recommended.

At first glance, this seems to be an argument in line with social reality. However, in the reality of a capitalist society where nursing care services have been commoditized, it is nothing less than a model for the old age of the petite bourgeoisie and above who have a principle of living alone and sufficient pension income, assets, and reliable personal connections that can be used for single life in old age. 

In contrast, the so-called "lonely death" problem symbolizes the difficulty of post-retirement life for the proletarian class, who have nothing. Singles in the proletariat class are reserve forces for lonely death.

On that point, as we saw in Chapter 3, since the notarized partnership system in a communist society is also an easy to use for partnerships between unmarried elderly people, the number of elderly households choosing the partnership may increase.

Of course, a public nursing care system based on communist mutual assistance would also be beneficial for singles. In that respect, the Social Services Councils set up in each section will incorporate the elderly living alone into the service network as a priority target in the social service plan within the section under their jurisdiction.

On Communism:Page30

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 5: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY -- WELFARE

2. Pensions and public assistance will no longer be necessary.

2.1. Irrationality of the pension system

The deterioration in the public old-age pension system (hereafter simply referred to as the pension system), which can be said to be the pillar of welfare state policy, will affect the post-retirement age of almost all citizens, with the exception of a few wealthy people who have sufficient retirement savings. This is one of the most serious deteriorations in the welfare state.

However, it is inevitable that the pension system, which was originally a product of an era when the aging rate was not as high as it is today and the average life expectancy was within a reasonable limit, will deteriorate in an era of declining birthrate, aging population, and longevity. So any promises by the government that pensions will continue into the future sound hollow. It is almost taboo to doubt the rationality of the pension system, but it is true that this system cannot be said to be unconditionally rational.

In the first place, it is too formal a system to forcibly retire at a certain age and drive them into pension life. There are people who are in their 60s and are still in good health and are motivated to work, and there is no problem even if there are "old  newcomers" who are over 60 and want to try new jobs.

However, under capitalism, old workers are considered to lack usefulness as a labor force. There are two ways to force older workers to retire: applying a uniform retirement age system and dismissing them individually. In any case, there is no change in the desire of capital companies to eliminate the declining productivity of the elderly labor force, which is not worth exploiting.

2.2. Communist retirement life

In contrast, life after retirement in a communist society is simple and free. Compulsory retirement based solely on age, including the mandatory retirement system, is legally prohibited as unfair employment discrimination based on age, so workers can continue to work until their desired age. (As shown in Chapter 3, it is possible that in the early days of communism, work obligations may be imposed on the core working generation.).

If you feel like retiring because of old age, all you have to do is leave quietly. As is already understood, in a communist society, the money economy has been abolished and all necessary goods and services can be obtained free of charge, so there is no anxiety about life associated with retirement. If long-term care becomes necessary, as we will see in the next section, comprehensive care can be received free of charge, and if it becomes severe, long-term medical care can also be received free of charge.

Conversely, you are free to retire early. In that respect, the capitalist social security system tends to concentrate on old people who have outlived their usefulness as wage serfs. Early retirement is therefore a pipe dream for anyone but the ultra-rich, and young or middle-aged retirees will have to rely on unemployment insurance and welfare services. 　

In a communist society, the situation is completely different. Since people can live without money, there is no need for a poverty relief system such as public assistance, nor a temporary social security system such as unemployment insurance. In extreme terms, both the old and the young can be unemployed with peace of mind.

A properly constructed and run communist society is free from poverty. A communist society, in which labor and consumption are completely separated, is a fundamentally welfare society, and there is no need to take lofty measures such as improving welfare.

2.3. Social Services Council

As mentioned above, although a communist society does not need a special anti-poverty system of social security that provides monetary benefits, as symbolized by pensions and public assistance, there is a system of non-monetary social services such as nursing care in a communist society. Rather, in a communist society where the money economy is abolished, such non-monetary social services will occupy the center. 　

Communist social services are not based on the application principle of waiting for applications from recipients. The application benefit principle is one of the measures to control the receipt of benefits in response to the capitalist limit of financial resources. The communist social service adopts the principle of planned benefits, even if the recipient does not apply for it, unless the recipient declines based on a rational reason. 　

In order to make this possible, the Social Services Council (hereinafter simply referred to as the "council") will be established as a public institution in charge of regional social service plans for each section of the commune. The council does not directly provide social services itself, but comprehensively organizes all social services within its own section. 　

Specifically, the task of the council is to keep track of the situation of potential recipients of social services in the section and draw up social work plans that are updated annually for coordinating so that those who need it can receive the services when they need them. Therefore, the chairperson of the council must be a duly qualified social worker, and the council members are delegated part-time to welfare and medical professionals and welfare service representatives within the section. 　　

Multiple social workers are assigned to the council, and in addition to receiving consultations from those who need it, they also discover those who need it based on information from volunteer cooperators and develop activities that lead to the arrangement of necessary services. By the way, regarding child welfare, the Minor Welfare Center is established separately from the council, but the council sometimes cooperates with the center to protect families with children.

On Communism:Page29

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 5: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  WELFARE

A communist society is essentially a welfare society in which everyone can live without worrying about food, clothing, housing, medical care, or nursing care. How is this possible?

1. Welfare system without any financial resources is not a utopian policy.

1.1. Contradictions of the Welfare State

Let us first confirm that so-called welfare is by no means a monopoly of communism, but rather an implication of preventing impoverishment of the working class within the framework of capitalism, as in the often idealized Nordic countries. As discussed in Chapter 1, it was also a form of capitalism with heavy makeup.

However, such capitalist welfare has one decisive limit. It derives from the fact that the bearer of welfare is the state - the welfare state. The state depends on tax revenue for its welfare financial resources. In other words, most of the welfare financial resources depend on the income of wage workers, that is, wage serfs. It was because wage serfs are almost tax serfs.

Even so, during the period of rapid growth and accumulation, when the rate of wage growth is high, national tax revenues will increase, there will be a surplus to implement stable welfare policies and raise the living standards of wage-earners. After all, it's just a de facto tax refund service. The golden age of the idealized "high welfare state" in Northern Europe was the period of rapid growth and accumulation until the middle of the 1970s, or the 1980s at the longest.

Eventually, with the oil crisis, the golden "good old days" ended in the advanced capitalist countries, and as we entered an era of slowing growth and global competition, wage income for workers stagnated and the nation began to fall short of tax revenues. Then, the welfare state begins to shake due to the intervention of the “small government” dogma derived from neo-liberalism = capital supremacism.

In this way, a capitalist welfare state has the contradiction that it thrives when the masses benefit from economic growth and capital accumulation and do not need welfare so much, and comes to a standstill when the masses desperately need welfare in times of low growth and economic crisis.

The necessity of rebuilding the welfare state is sometimes called out, but the wall of financial resources is thick. A tax increase is inevitable, but in such a case, the capitalist nation knows how to shift the burden onto labor rather than capital, so rather than raising the corporate tax, it would start raising the consumption tax for the common people. It is mandatory. If the government were to run into a fiscal deficit that could not be covered by such tax hikes, it would not only face the crisis of rebuilding the welfare state, but also the survival of the state itself.

1.2. Two types of  "welfare society" 

The United States has refused to accept the concept of a welfare state because of its ideology that emphasizes individual freedom. For this reason, when the Roosevelt administration introduced the social security system in the 1930s, facing the Great Depression, it came to be called the New Deal policy, with the implication of revising the social contract of the people.

However, the welfare state is a taboo in the United States, and even after the implementation of the New Deal policy, the capitalist self-help principle has not changed. On the other hand, many of the welfare services are provided by private volunteer groups and profit-making welfare organizations based on the spirit of mutual assistance, making up for the lack of welfare services provided by the state.

In that respect, it can be said that the United States, which rejects the very concept of a welfare state and is based on the principle of self-help, is practicing a kind of communist welfare centered on mutual assistance by the private sector.

However, it is only an external approximation, and its essence is, of course, different from communism. Private welfare in the United States is basically nothing more than the practice of social capitalism, which entrusts welfare services to wealthy people's donations and profit-making enterprises.

On the other hand, it is logically natural that the welfare of a communist society where the state is abolished is not centered on the state, nor is it entirely tossed to voluntary or commercial welfare of the private sector. It will center on a welfare society in the true sense of the word.

Specifically, the commune, which plays a central role in administration related to daily life, and the regional area as an intermediate municipality, which serves as a base for regional medical care, will work together to provide services as the forefront of welfare. In that respect, communist welfare has a strong character of public welfare, but it does not mean that all private welfare will be publicly requisitioned.

In a communist society, all private welfare organizations and private hospitals are refined into unpaid volunteer organizations. This is the inevitable result of the abolition of the wage labor system in a communist society. These private volunteer organizations are registered with communes or regional areas, and under their supervision, they will provide their own unique services free of charge.

1.3. Completely free welfare

It may invite skepticism about whether advanced welfare services can be realized by relying on volunteers. However, isn't welfare originally based on the spirit of volunteerism?

However, there may be some truth to the concern that if even highly skilled professionals such as medical doctors become unpaid volunteers, the number of aspiring doctors will drop sharply, leading to a decisive shortage of MDs.

Indeed, it is possible that today's MDs are attracted by their high income and attract many applicants, but is this the true nature of the profession? It is difficult to understand under capitalism, where even many non-commercial functions have become quasi-merchant based on profit-oriented, but MDs are originally supposed to be public and humanitarian functions specializing in the treatment and prevention of diseases. 

This is related to education, which is the subject of the next chapter. In a communist society, a medical education system will be introduced in which those who have a high awareness of such public functions can become MDs.

In any case, communist welfare, whether public or private, is strongly characterized as a system of mutual assistance supported by the free provision that comes from the abolition of the monetary system. But its greatest strength lies in the fact that it is to be released from the unstable element of financial resources, which means all welfare entities will be able to fully provide truly necessary services without worrying about money in a communist society.

On Communism:Page28

 Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION 

6. A judicial system that does not judge will appear.

6.1. Communist judicial system

Montesquieu, who was the founder of the theory of the separation of the three powers and was himself a hereditary judge of the french Ancien Régime regarded the judicial power as a “terrible power,” and advocated a thorough suppression of it with the symbolic expression, saying “The judicial power is, so to speak, nothing.” He preached so figuratively because he knew that in a bourgeois state the judicial power could not literally be nullified.

The reason why judicial power cannot be nullified in the bourgeois state is that in a capitalist monetary economy, disputes over money, which is the "capital" for both individuals and businesses, will never cease. In fact, even crimes against life, such as murder, very often involve financial problems in the motive or background.

On the other hand, in a communist society where the monetary economy is abolished, disputes over money will naturally disappear. Nonetheless, if conflicts are an integral part of human society, the need for a judicial power to officially handle conflicts will not disappear.

However, the character of the judicial system will undergo a major change: the authoritarian system of the court, which judges people from the podium, as we have taken for granted, will disappear, and a dispute settlement system that does not judge people will appear in its place.

Such a dispute settlement system, which is broadly called the communist judicial system, is under the juridictin of the Commons' Convention, not the "independent" power, under the Commons' Convention system, which does not adopt the concept of separation of powers. It is one of the contents of commons' sovereignty. Below, I would like to sketch a part of it.

6.2. Equity Commissioner and Truth Commission

The two main pillars of the communist dispute settlement system are the Equity Commissioner and the Truth Commission. In any case, it is not a system that gives forced resolution from above in the form of a "judgment" like a traditional court system, but a system that aims for a more lenient arbitrational solution.

Equity Commissioners are judicial officers who intervene between the parties to the dispute, listen to the claims of both sides, and mediate in the event of civil or family disputes. As a general rule, the Equity Commissioners handle a case alone, but in complicated cases, two Commissioners can be in charge if necessary the Equity Commissioner system.

Since in a communist society the money economy will be abolished, disputes over money will naturally disappear, and most legal disputes are expected to be domestic disputes involving family and kinship, the Equity Commissioner should be suitable.

On the other hand, the Truth Commission is a collegial body responsible for clarifying the truth of crimes—which, as we saw in the previous article, come to be grasped as anti-social offenses in communist society—and , will be convened after a request by the tribune of due process, which will be described later. Its function is equivalent to clarification of the truth in a traditional criminal court, but it does not impose criminal penalties, but only clarifies and confirms the truth. 

Equity commissioners are full-time offcers appointed from among lawyers in each commune, and truth commissioners are lawyers, experts suitable for the case, and ordinary citizens with delegate's license in each regional area. It is a part-time position that is appointed on a case-by-case basis. Equity commissioners and truth commissioners are both appointed by the Commons' Convention.

The Commons' Convention with the right to appoint is different between the federal zone and the unitary zone. In the case of the federal zone, both the federal  Convention and the quasi-zonal Convention have dual rights, but in the case of the unitary zone, it is optional whether the zonal Convention or the provincial Convention has the right.

6.3. Correction and Probation Commission

One of the most important changes in communist society is the abolition of the system of punishment. If all crimes related to money, which account for the majority of crimes in capitalist society, are eradicated, the scientific recognition that the few remaining anti-social criminal acts are not crimes that should be sanctioned through punishment but rather pathologies that should be dealt with therapeutically has spread widely among the public. If that happens, new scientific systems of correctional treatment should be developed to replace the penal system.

In response to this, the  Correction and Probation Commission will be established as a collegial body to impose correctional and probationary treatment on offenders. The purpose of this system is to impose optimal treatment on offenders through medical, psychological, and sociological investigations after clarification by the Truth Commission.

The Correction and Probation Commission is composed of experts with specialized knowledge of correction and probation. The right to appoint the Correction and Probation Commissioner shall be the same as for the Equity Commissioner and the Truth Commissioner.

6.4. Tribunes

A tribune is a public official with a long history in ancient Rome whose important mission was to protect the rights and interests of the common people, but it can be revived in a communist judicial system without courts.

The new tribune here is a supervisory judicial officer tasked with defending basic human rights and civil rights in modern times. In this respect, it is distinguished from the ancient Roman tribune, which was a political post.

The tribunes are divided into two types: the general tribunes, which have the widest range of authority, and the specialized tribunes, which have individual fields of expertise. 

General tribunes are appointed by the Commons' Convention of each level and cover all institutions under the jurisdiction of the Commons' Convention, and also conduct complaints and dispute settlements concerning the application and enforcement of laws and regulations, and audit compliance with laws and regulations.

The most important specialized tribunes are those who specialize in due process of law: the tribune for habeas corpus. Its most important duties are in the field of criminal justice, issuing various compulsory investigation warrants such as detention warrants, search and seizure warrants, surveillance warrants for interception of communications, secret filming, etc., and the accompanying protection of the rights of suspects and victims. Its main duties include convening the Truth Committee and requesting reconsideration.

In addition, it is also responsible for issuing habeas corpus writs and directly releasing persons, who have been unlawfully or unjustly detained regardless of whether privately or publicly, at the request of the parties, their relatives, or the third parties.

A tribune for habeas corpus is appointed by the Commons' Convention of the provincial area (in the case of the federal zone, the quasi-zone) by determining their jurisdiction for each district, but exercises its authority alone and independently of the Commons' Convention.

In addition, specialized tribunes include tribune for privacy, tribune for laborers, tribune for anti-discrimination, and commissioner for children, who are all appointed by the Commons' Convention of each regional area and extended commune (large city). It is possible to newly establish, consolidate and abolish as necessary according to the policy of each Commons' Convention.

6.5. Jurisprudence committee

In any dispute settlement process, disputes may arise over the interpretation of applicable laws. Under the thesis of separation of powers, it has become common knowledge that the interpretation of laws enacted by the legislature is wholly left to the judiciary, but the Commons' Convention system does not take such an undemocratic and irresponsible approach. There is a jurisprudence committee set up in each Commons' Convention as a body that deliberates disputes over the interpretation of laws.

While a jurisprudence committee is one of the standing committees of the Commons' Convention, it is a specialized committee that has the final power to interpret all laws and regulations except the Charter (constitution)*, and its members are all lawyers who hold the status of special delegate. A special delegate is an observer position that participates in the deliberations of the Convention, but does not have the right to vote.

*The interpretation of the Charter is handled by the charter committee, also a standing and specialized committee in charge of charter issues including its revision and interpretation. For this reason, the members of the charter committee are divided into general delegates and special delegates (judicial delegates) made up of lawyers who specialize in charter interpretation.

6.6 Impeachment Courts

In the communist judicial system without a court system, there is an impeachment court system for public officials as an exceptional one.

A typical example of this is a special court that examines illegal acts such as corruption and abuse of authority by delegates of the Commons' Convention and public officials appointed by the Commons' Convention. However, the judgment of the impeachment court is not a punishment, but is shown in the form of dismissal, suspension or deprivation of civil rights, so it is more like an administrative court than a criminal court.

The Impeachment Court of the Commons' Convention is a non-permanent court that is set up based on the resolution of the Commons' Convention in each level for each case. The prosecutors in charge of investigation and prosecution and the judges are composed of lawyers appointed by the Commons' Convention.

Other impeachment courts include the Special Human Rights Court, which is a non-permanent impeachment court that examines cases of human rights violations by public officials, and the permanent Corruption Tribunal for Public Officials, which examines cases of corruption of public officials and public figures equivalent to civil servants. However, these details are omitted here.

On Communism:Page27

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION 

5. The police system will no longer be necessary. 

5.1. Drastic decrease in crime

In the national system since the early modern period, the system of the police, which is dedicated to maintaining public order on a daily basis, has become the standard. The word "police" is synonymous with the city-state "polis" and directly means "government" in old French. In other words, the compulsory power that secures national governance is the police power, and the police agency exercises it systematically.

In that sense, the state and the police are inextricably linked, and as long as the state exists, there will always be demand for the police system. In fact, the protection of the state itself is the raison d'etre of the police, and it is common throughout the world that arresting anti-state criminals is an important task.

However, it is not possible to simply say that in a communist society where the state system itself will be abolished, the police system will logically and inevitably become unnecessary. This is because it is common throughout the world that the most important role of police agencies is to crack down on crimes on a daily basis. As long as there is a criminal phenomenon, the abolition of the police system will be ridiculed as a pipe dream.

Still, in a communist society, things are very different. As we have seen before, in a communist society where the money economy is abolished, at least money-related crimes will be exterminated. And given the fact that most crimes involve money, it is certain that the elimination of money-related crimes would warrant a truly revolutionary improvement in the security situation.

If so, the necessity of the police system, which has become almost the common sense of humankind, will be questioned. At the very least, there will be no need for a heavy physical police system. However, it seems unlikely that the act of violating the rights of others will be eradicated even in a communist society, considering the sad nature of human beings.

Nevertheless, such rights infringements will no longer be perceived as immoral crimes, but as antisocial offenses. There is no denying the need for an agency to crack down on such antisocial offenses, but it no longer needs to be the traditional police system. The following is an example of such non-police crackdowns.

5.2. Civil Patrol and Investigative Commission

In many countries, a system is being established in which the police have comprehensive jurisdiction over crime prevention and investigation. As a result, the police have become more powerful, and to varying degrees, a police state is underway. In contrast, the communist crackdown on crime clearly separates crime prevention and investigation.

For this reason, The Civil Patrol will be established as a private but legally authorized organization that is mainly responsible for crime prevention on the front lines of the local community. The Civil Patrol is the corps organized in each commune. It is not just a vigilante group, but its personnel are basically part-time except for core staff and semi-professionals who have been trained in the skills necessary for security duties. 

Since the corps is a private organization, it does not have formal investigative powers, and its duties basically consist of unarmed patrol activities, initial action to crime scenes upon receiving reports, including urgent responce and immediate arrest. However, for very minor offenses, it would be reasonable to give them the authority to investigate cases and admonish offenders.

On the other hand, an Investigative Commission will be set up as an organization to engage in official investigations after receiving communications and reports from the Civil Patrol. This is also not a form of police, but a non-police and compact specialized investigative agency.

As the name "commission" suggests, it is a collegial body consisting of commissioners who have been promoted from investigators and external commisioners. The commission does not direct the investigation of individual cases, but its main task is to enact, revise, or abolish investigative norms, which serve as work standards for investigators, and it is responsible for overseeing organizational reforms, abolishments and new establishments, as well as personnel affairs and disciplinary action.

The main body of the Investigative Commission is an investigative personnel consisting of full-time investigators with specialized knowledge and skills related to investigative activities, including forensic investigation or emergent intervention. Except for minor cases that are handled only by the Civil Patrol, when an incident occurs that needs to be responded, the investigation commission will take over the initial action of the Civil Patrol and conduct a formal investigation. 

It is desirable that this institution be established in units of the provincial areas or quasi-zones in the federal zones in order to have jurisdiction over a wider area.*

*In a small zone, it is reasonable to establish a single zonal Investigative Commission. A federal zone will have dual installations at the zonal and quasi-zonal levels. Also in a unitary zone, it would be beneficial to establish a central investigative assistance agency to manage zonal investigations and wanted warrants. In either form, a branch office is established in each district.

5.3. Traffic Safety Headquarters and Maritime Safety Headquarters　

Regarding traffic enforcement, which is the authority of the police in many countries, Traffic Safety Headquarters will be established in provincial areas or quasi-zones to oversee the Highway Patrol that maintains traffic order and specialize in handling and investigating automobile accidents. 

Also, the maritime version of the Traffic Safety Headquarters is the Maitime Safety Headquarters, which oversees the Coast Guard. In light of the unity of the ocean, it would be efficient to establish this agency in zonal units.*

*As we have already seen, there are no sovereign nations with exclusive territorial waters in the communist world, and the World Commonwealth basically has the right to control all sea areas on earth, but each zone retains the sea area under its jurisdiction agreed upon with the World Commonwealth, and is guaranteed preferential navigation and fishing rights in that sea area.

5.4. Special investigative agency

Separate from the Investigative Commission, several special investigative agencies will be established limited to investigating specific criminal cases. The Traffic Safety Headquarters and the Coast Guard Headquarters are one of such special investigative agencies in relation to traffic offence cases.

As one of the other examples, the Land Management Agency's investigative division is a kind of economic investigative agency that specializes in the detection of illegal occupation and illegal transactions on land that is propertyless in a communist society (See Page 13).

Furthermore, as we will see next time, there is a group of impeachment trial systems that mainly examine the corrupt behavior of public officials, and the impeachment prosecutor's team that intensively investigates the cases related to this impeachment trial and prosecutes them in the impeachment court is also part of an special investigative agency. This is a extraordinary investigation and prosecution body that is set up for each case, and the all the impeachment prosecutors are lawyers appointed each time.

In addition, depending on the actual situation in each zone, it is within the discretion to establish other special investigative agencies, but if the number of special investigative agencies increases too much, it is feared that this will cause unnecessary confusion, such as disputes over jurisdiction between investigative agencies.

On Communism:Page26

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION

4. The bureaucracy is truly overthrown.

4.1. Integration of legislative and executive functions

Modern states have come to have a huge bureaucracy regardless of their system. As a result, the parliamentary system, which is tacitly equated with democracy, has been undermined by the bureaucracy that manages the backstage of parliamentary deliberations, and has has made democracy a superficial signboard.

Therefore, the slogan of overthrowing the bureaucracy tends to end up as an empty phrase because, under the idea of "separation of powers," executive is considered separately from legislation.

Executive  is not simply a function of power that technically enforces the laws enacted by the legislature, but the comprehensive power function that exactly “does politics.” It can even include the power to draft legislation. For this reason, together with the lack of legislative capacity of the legislative branch, the bureaucrats in the executive branch became independent, and through the executive branch's right to submit bills, the bureaucrats effectively usurped the legislative power. Thus, lawmakers become rubber stampers.*

*The U.S. parliamentary system, which does not allow the executive branch to submit bills and all bills are enacted by members of parliament, has characters similar to the Commons' Convention system. On the other hand, the US legislative process is dominated by pressure groups representing industry interests and lobbyists acting as their agents. It can be said that the control of the legislative process by  interest groups is also a form of the hollowing out of democracy through a route other than the bureaucracy.

In order to overcome such a situation, greatly strengthening the political initiative of the head of the executive branch would be the pinnacle of "boss politics," which is the path that leads to executive dictatorship and eventually to fascism.

Instead, the path to "true democracy" is to cut into the classical structure of the separation of powers and integrate the legislative and executive functions under the Commons' Convention.

However, there are many similarities between the Commons' Convention and the parliament in terms of their outward structure. For example, the Commons' Convention, like many parliaments, has standing committees for each policy area and special committees to deal with specific issues.

The difference from the general parliamentary systems is that there is no government that makes policies and submits bills, so all the proposals are initiated by the delegates themselves, and the standing committees or special committees are responsible for everything from policy planning to bill drafting.

In order to make this possible, each committee is staffed with a large number of full-time and part-time experts to provide strong support for the above process. These specialists are widely appointed from among experts familiar with individual policies and laws, such as researchers, lawyers, and other various practitioners.

The decisive difference from the parliamentary systems is that the Commons' Convention also has executive functions in addition to legislative functions. That is, all administrative agencies, including law enforcement agencies, are subordinate to the Convention and are subject to the relevant standing committees whose chairs are responsible for directing and supervising those agencies.

The chair of each committee plays a kind of ministerial role, and the political council, a collegial body composed of all chairs of committees and the general chair and vice general chair of the Commons' Convention, constitutes the executive bureau of the Commons' Convention.

This political council is similar to the Cabinet in the current parliamentary system, but it is not just an exucutive body, but a central body responsible for coordinating the agenda of the Commons' Convention. However, the political council does not have a head position equivalent to that of the prime minister, and the general chair of the Commons' Convention presides over the affairs of the council.

The basic structure of the Commons' Convention as described above is common throughout the levels within a zone. As long as the legislative and administrative functions are integrated under the Commons' Convention, the Convention is more than just a legislative body and it must be a permanent non-sessional institution.

Also, in light of the large number of duties of the Commons' Convention, the number of delegates must be much larger than the number of representatives of the current parliament. In this respect, the abolition of the money economy eliminates the necessity of putting the cart before the horse to reduce the fixed number due to financial difficulties, because delegates to the Commons' Convention are completely unpaid at all the levels.

4.2. Statutes and policy guidelines

The legislative function of the Commons' Convention is not much different from that of the present parliament. As mentioned earlier, the respective local Commons' Conventions are also capable of enacting proper laws concerning matters under their authority.

By the way, since modern states generally advocate rule of law, they have a strong urge to enforce all policies by laws, especially statutes. The very statute is the greatest weapon of the bureaucrats familiar with its formal legislative arts. If any policy has to be legislated in the end, it will fall into the realm of bureaucracy.

However, it is a big assumption that all policies must be legislated. In fact, there are not so many areas that should be legislated, except for areas such as the judiciary, where the exercise of power must be properly regulated. In particular, in fields related to the people's livelihood, formal legislation can actually lead to a loss of flexibility in policy development.

Therefore, if legislation is not necessary or is not appropriate, policy guidelines will be used instead of statutes. A policy guideline is a type of normative document that defines rules for the execution of certain policies. Although these guidelines are not as binding as laws, they are not merely policy goals; they have a normative character that must be  conformed by the relevant public officials.

However, regardless of whether it is based on statutes or policy guidelines, there is no change in the fact that the Commons' Convention must work out its own from the first stage. For this reason the legislative procedure of the Convention will be more elaborate than that of the parliament. Examples are shown below.

First of all, everything starts with a proposal by the delegates (at least three delegates), but the proposal is always made to the committee to which the delegates who made the proposal belong. When the proposal is received, the committee first conducts preliminary deliberations (not open to the public) to determine whether the content of the proposal should be made into a statute or a guideline in the first place, and if so, which one is appropriate.

If a resolution is obtained that it should be made into a statute or a guideline, a legislative research panel will be established that includes the proposer, other delegates, and outside experts. The panel will make written inquiries to a wide range of external experts, and prepare a research report while examining the contents. This report will be open to the public and will be deliberated by the subcommittee in charge to decide whether or not to adopt it.

If it is passed, a bill or a draft guideline will be created based on the report. In the case of a bill, the legislative support bureau of the Commons' Convention will scrutinize the correctness of the formal wording and expressions, and consistency with other laws and regulations. In the case of a draft guideline as well, it will be submitted to the committee for deliberation after being carefully examined by the legislative support bureau regarding its consistency with the laws.

A policy guideline will be effective if it is passed by a committee. This point is the biggest difference from the law. In the case of a bill, after it has been passed by the committee, the full text is distributed to all delegates in advance, and it is sent to the plenary session after being circulated.

Today, the plenary session of the parliaments, which adopts the committee-centered principle, has become almost a ritual, but the plenary session of the Commons' Conventionis important as a place for final general deliberations. There, questions and answers are exchanged with the delegates who made the proposal, and remand to the committee or amendment is also allowed in addition to approval or rejection.

In the case of remand, the opinions expressed in the question and answer session will be brought back to the committee, and a vote will be taken on whether to amend the bill or continue deliberations. If an amendment is to be made, the legislative research panel will be re-established and the above procedure will be repeated.

4.3. Citizens' Initiatives

The above is an overview of the basic legislative procedure of the Commons' Convention, but in a communist society that upholds commons' sovereignty, legislative proposals by citizens (initiatives) are also encouraged. In this regard, at the level of local autonomy, systems such as direct initiative and plebiscite have already been developed, and communism will push this direction even further.

On the other hand, at the zone level, it is difficult to institutionalize direct initiative because it deals with major policies that affect the interests of the whole popilation, and the the public petition system (indirect initiative) is to be strengthened. A petition to the bourgeois state is only an appeal to the ruling government, but a public petition under the system of the Commons' Convention is a powerful means of public proposition.

In such cases, formal petitions must be signed with a specified number of signatures to prove their validity. After that, lawfully petitioned matters are accepted by the petition committee, one of the standing committees of the Commons' Convention, and the committee votes on whether or not the matter should be referred to the relevant committee. If it is decided to referred, the relevant committee conducts preliminary deliberations on whether it should be made into a statute or a guideline. Subsequent proceedings will follow the legislative proceedings described above, but in this case the legislative research panel will consist primarily of the chair of the relevant committee.

The above public petition system should not be confused with lobbying activities. The lobbying activities that flourish under the parliamentary system are exactly befitting of the bourgeois state, which is the community of interests of the bourgeois class, and are nothing less than a campaign to expand the rights of those who have interests to enact laws that are advantageous to them.

Under the system of the the Commons' Convention, lobbying activities by interested parties to delegates are prohibited by law. Anyone wishing to enact legislation must, and that is the only route, choose the aforementioned public petition or direct initiative method.

4.4. Dismantling and conversion of bureaucracy

Thus, under the Commons' Convention system, the strongholds of the bureaucracy such as central ministries and agencies, prefectural government offices, and municipal government offices would all be dismantled. However, judging from the structure of the Commons' Convention as described above, we should be able to convince ourselves that it is possible to manage society without a bureaucracy.

All former bureaucratic institutions will basically be converted into policy research institutions or simple administrative service agencies. 

A policy research organization is a think tank under the direct control of the Commons' Convention established for each policy area (for example, the Environmental Policy Research Institute, the Transport Policy Research Institute, etc.). They are responsible for providing necessary information and statistics in response to requests from delegates and committees for policy planning and legislation of the Convention.

The core staff of these think tanks is a kind of researcher, and unlike bureaucrats, they do not get involved in drafting bills, nor do they comment on the propriety of policies. Such think tanks are similarly set up in the respective local Conventions.

On Communism:Page25

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION

3. People achieve "true democracy."

3.4. Breaking away from "boss politics"

By deprofessionalizing politics, it will also be possible to break away from the "boss politics" - a political practice in which political party executives dictate the political process - that has prevailed in the world regardless of the type of political system.

Today, leadership theory that longs for a "strong leader" is popular in various fields, and it has become a standard topic in the world of politics. The belief that humans cannot act without a strong leader is still deeply rooted around the world.

However, in a complex human society, a superhuman who can single-handedly grasp and guide everything cannot exist. A "strong leader" is either an illusion or a monstrous tyrant. Humans boast that they are primates that have evolved from monkeys, but if nothing can be done without bosses, humans have not yet passed the monkey stage. In reality, human society, especially politics, is better managed without bosses.

The Commons' Convention system does not have a leading position equivalent to that of the president, prime minister, or governor, mayor. In other words, there is no single leader in the Commons' Convention who can pull everything together.

In the first place, under the Commons' Convention system, party politics, which is the stage for "boss politics" - in this case, it does not matter whether it is a one-party system or a multi-party system - is also wiped out. Political parties under the Commons' Convention system are guaranteed freedom of peaceful and lawful activities without any distinction from other voluntary political organizations, but participation in the Commons' Convention is no longer possible on a party basis due to the delegation lottery system.

By doing so, it is possible to transfer the political process that has been dominated by party bosses, regardless of whether it is a one-party system or a multi-party system, into the hands of the common people. It would also change the male-dominated nature of politics that remains deeply rooted around the world - with the majority of party bosses being men - and ensure an increase in female delegates. We will call this new form of communist democracy "true democracy."

Traditionall - although there are still some countries that have not yet become a tradition - the expression "parliamentary democracy," equating parliamentary systems with democracies, has become established. Strictly speaking, so-called indirect democracies such as parliamentary systems have not reached "true democracy," and can even be called "pseudo democracy," if not untrue democracy.

3.5. Majority decision and minority decision

The Commons' Convention, which is a manifestation of "true democracy", also shows great innovation in terms of voting methods. In the existing parliamentary system, the majority rule is the absolute principle. However, discarding the minority opinion and using the power of the majority is not the way to be a "true democracy," but nothing less than the dictatorship of the majority.

The same is true of Commons' Convention, which is a collegial body, in that the final decision is made based on the principle of a majority vote after deliberating bills and other bills. However, the Commons' Convention, which is freed from both partisan politics and boss politics, does not absolutize the majority rule.

For Example, even in the case of a majority vote, if the vote difference is less than 5%, it will be regarded as a rejection, and a narrow majority vote will not be tolerated. The intent lies in respecting minority opinions with a narrow margin of less than 5 percent.

On the other hand, in the case of a majority vote with a difference of 5% or more, if more than one-third of the delegates in attendance vote against it, the majority vote shall be provisionally approved and a second vote shall be taken after three years. The purpose of this is to create room for a new resolution to be passed in the future, when minority opinions that were aggregated into negative votes will turn into majority opinions.

In that case, the provisionally passed bill will be enforced as a law once, but if it is rejected as a result of a re-voting three years later, the law will be promptly abolished.

In this way, the simultaneous adoption of minority proposals that have received a certain amount of support while prioritizing majority voting is called minority decision. It will be understood from the above argument that the minority decision here is not a concept that is opposed to the majority rule, but a compatible concept.

3.6. Prohibition of pandering to the masses

"True democracy" is similar to, but not to be confused with populist politics. Pandering to the masses is a type of dictatorship of the majority that flatters or actively agitates the public, manipulates public opinion, and creates a false majority opinion, and is far from "true democracy." For this reason, there are numerous examples in history of populist politics leading to the birth of terrible dictators.

The Commons' Convention is a system that stands at the opposite end of populist politics. This is not merely an ideal, but is guaranteed as a code of conduct that prohibits delegates from conducting or referring to external opinion polls when proposing, discussing, or voting on issues at the Commons' Convention, and from being influenced by the tone of external mass media or anonymous comments on the Internet.

Some view opinion polls as a scientific method to ensure democracy, and in fact, in parliamentary politics, the results of opinion polls are often treated as if they were the will of the people, but polls are the polls themselves. The content of the questions and the aggregation of the answers are usually designed so that the users of opinion polls can obtain the results they want, and it is nothing more than a scientifically disguised means of pandering to the masses.

Once the delegates to the Commons' Convention are selected by lottery and take office, they shall be isolated from external influences, and shall initiate, debate, and participate in decisions only in accordance with the reference and inquiry procedures established by the Convention. Failure to do so constitutes a violation of the delegates code of conduct.

On Communism:Page24

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION

3. People achieve "true democracy."

3.1. Awakening from "faith in election"

Earlier I said that the Commons' Convention is neither a parliament nor a political party. It is a representative body peculiar to communism where the state is abolished. It resembles a parliament insofar as it is representative, but it is decisively different from the so-called parliamentary system in that it does not adopt an electoral system by voting.

Today, in countries where parliamentary systems are firmly established, one "faith" in electoral systems is widely shared: elections are the essence of democracy. From such a "faith", it could be said that a Commons' Convention system that denies the electoral system is inherently anti-democratic.

It would be unfair not to admit that election with universal suffrage, which does not discriminate based on status, property, or gender, has made a historical achievement in expanding the class framework for political participation compared to the hereditary politics of royalty and aristocracy in the old days. 

However, if you take a closer look at the legislators elected by the "universal" suffrage, you will find that they are not ordinary people, but mostly men belonging to the proprietor class, though you can also see some proprietresses in recent years.

In particular, under party politics, political parties informally choose candidates before elections through the selection of candidates, so those who do not have connections to political parties are pre-excluded. Even if a person who is not affiliated with a political party runs for election, the wall of funds is thick, and it will inevitably become something like a hobby of a wealthy person.

It is no exaggeration to say that although the system of universal suffrage expanded the right to vote, the right to stand for election remains virtually limited to the wealthy class. If so, even political clans that monopolize politics as a de facto hereditary family business are formed, even though it is based on universal suffrage. However, considering that the universal suffrage movement itself was historically a class struggle of the progressive bourgeoisie against the royal aristocracy, it is inevitable that the victorious bourgeoisie itself will become aristocratic. 

Still, you may ask: Elections determine the verdict of the electorate, and the winner of those elections, hereditary or not, is democratically sanctified, right? This is the central myth of “faith in election.”

But I dare to ask: Which factor is the “sanctifying” of a candidate in an election, personality or policies? The answer is neither. It is connections and image, especially the latter. The recent media/internet-led election campaigns, which rely heavily on visual representation, have developed sophisticated image strategies, making elections increasingly popular vote-like mega-events. Therefore, no matter how good a candidate is in character and makes a splendid pledge, if he fails in his image strategy, he must be prepared to lose the election.

It is not unreasonable to fear that the outcome of such image-oriented elections will be the emergence of agitator politicians who will rise to the top through skillful manipulation of the masses through the media and internet. In this respect, the fact that the Nazis, led by the eminent agitator Hitler, came to power by neither coup nor revolution, but by parliamentary elections with universal suffrage under the "democratic" Weimar Republic, remains historically significant. It is a great lesson.

In this way, it can be seen that it is not simply possible to say that elections unconditionally guarantee democracy. Rather, aren't elections, whether or not money is given or received, all advertising and bribery, nothing more than a political version of business transactions? Or aren't they nothing more than job hunting for ambitious proprietors and proprietresses with money and connections? Once you try to push it away like this, you may be able to wake up from the deep-seated "faith in election."

3.2. Delegate lottery system

Today, voices lamenting the ignorance and incompetence of elected politicians, including parliament members, can be heard all over the world. Members of the legislative branch, in particular, call themselves law makers, but in reality they – with the exception of US legislators whose country does not authorize the right to introduce legislation to the government – have ended up as rubber stampers that only put a rubber stamp of approval on the bill submitted by the government.

That should be true, because the election process is not a test to measure the candidates' policy-making and legislative abilities. It is no wonder that there are law makers who, even if elected, are incapable of drafting a single bill on their own.

In contrast, delegates to the Commons' Convention are recruited and drawn by lottery from among those who have passed the delegate license examination and obtained a license. This examination covers not only basic subjects such as policy making, legislative techniques, and political ethics necessary to act as general/federal and local delegates - one common qualification for both - but it also tests basic and comprehensive sophistication in core subjects such as politics, law, economy, the environment, and individual major policy fields such as welfare/medical care, education/culture. If you pass this exam, you are guaranteed to be able to act as a delegate. 

Although it is called an exam, it is not a memory-dependent cramming test, but textbooks are allowed to be brought in and referred to, and information selection and critical thinking skills are tested. There is no fear of becoming a minority elite selection because it is set to a level that allows a larger number of people to surely pass the exam.

In this way, those who pass the delegate license exam will be registered in the official list of delegate license holders, and from there they will be publicly recruited and drawn by lottery as delegates to the Commons' Convention of each level with a fixed term of office.

If such a system is adopted, there is no need for an age limit similar to the age for election in the electoral system. In fact, a 15-year-old licens holder is even more qualified to serve as a delegate than a unlicensed 51-year-old. Similarly, a foreign-born person with delegate license is more suitable for delegate than native-born person without license. 

It should be noted that, when drawing lots for delegates, division of districts like constituencies in the electoral system is not considered. It is sufficient to simply draw lots from all over the zone until a fixed number is reached, and the same is true for each local area. By adopting a simple lottery system in this way, delegates will no longer act as influence peddlers who try to induce profits to their own hometowns, like parliament members under the electoral system.

 

3.3. Politics as a non-profession

A more important consequence of the delegate lottery system is that the status of delegates ceases to be a "profession." This is another major difference from the parliamentary system.

Although under the parliamentary system, the term of office of members is generally set to a few years, because of the unique "asset" of electoral power base, continuous multiple elections are possible, and politicians becomes a fixed occupation, which in turn leads to the formation of hereditary political clans that turn politics into a family business. As a result, parliamentary politics takes on the character of aristocracy.

On the other hand, in the delegate lottery system, the probability of winning consecutive elections in a lottery that depends on chance and luck is low, so the rotation of delegates is quick and the position of delegates is not a fixed position.

Moreover, since delegates to the Commons' Convention are allowed to hold concurrent jobs  (as we saw in the previous chapter, the drastic reduction of working hours in communist societies makes this possible), today's professional politicians as is the case, they will not fall into a privileged class that has lost the sense of ordinary people's lives.

If you play around with the title of Max Weber's famous book, you can realize "politics as a non-profession" rather than "politics as a profession". Politics is essentially a common task for all of us, human beings as social animals.

On Communism:Page23

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION

2. Local autonomy gains its highest.

2.1. Commune autonomy as a cornerstone

Communism essentially includes local autonomy, as the word communism is etymologically related to commune, which means a local municipality. Here, as another significance of the sublation of the state, this old and new problem of local autonomy comes to the fore.

From a political point of view, communism is politics centered on the commune in each zone. A commune is the fundamental minimum unit of communist local autonomy.

In fact, even in the capitalist bourgeois state, municipal autonomy is a pillar of local autonomy, but centralization is rampant in modern bourgeois states. This bourgeois centralized state system threatens municipal autonomy not only in centralized states, but also in federal states where the states that make up the federation hold significant  power.

2.2. Three or four layers of local autonomy

There is no absolute formula for how the local autonomy system should be in communism, but for the time being, it is possible to assume three or four layers of local autonomy.

I have already mentioned that the commune will be the cornerstone. The commune in communism is suitable for their central position, and have jurisdiction over a wide range of administrative matters related to daily life, such as housing, as well as administrative matters related to social status, such as resident registration and identification.

In addition, in principle, there is no hierarchical classification according to the size of the population in the communes of a communist society, and they are all of the same rank regardless of the name such as city / town / village. It is also possible to set up an extended commune consisting of several communes, but as a commune it is on a par with other communes.

However, since it would be an excessive burden for the commune to be responsible for highly universal administration such as regional medical care and compulsory education, a regional area (i.e., county) is established as an intermediate local authority that is one size larger than commune and can handle those fields.

On the other hand, it is possible to set up the section as an arbitrary minimum autonomous unit within a commune as a front line of daily life matters (for example, the problem of illegally parked bicycles) that is too narrow for the commune to handle. Through these sections, it will be possible to promote the formation of new local communities.

With respect to the provincial area (province), which is the broadest autonomous authority in each zone, its duties are limited to maintaining order, firefighting, disaster relief, maintenance administration such as road and river management, and advanced medical care that cannot be covered by the regional area, in order to avoid centralization of the provincial area.

It is also allowed to set up the federal zone (its antonym is the unitary zone) composed of quasi-zones that retain a higher degree of autonomy than the provincial area, or the composite zone giving quasi-zone status to a part of the zone. ＊You may call a quasi-zone a "zonelet" (meaning "small zone") for brevity.

As will be described in detail in the final chapter, the provincial area or quasi-zone will also be blocks that are used as election districts for representatives of the Commons' Convention of the grand zone, which is a trans-regional division of the World Commonwealth.

As described above, each of the three levels of local authorities, the commune, regional area, provincial area, or quasi-zone, is in an equal horizontal relationship (however, the section is subordinate to the commune) and functions organically, while developing communist autonomy.

Of these, on the three levels, excluding the section, the Commons' Convention is set up as a catch-all power base just like in the zone. As a result, even at the local level, a kind of "governmental" institutions such as government offices and prefectural offices will be abolished, and they will be transformed into pure resident service institutions and local policy research institutions that report directly to the Commons' Convention of each level.

For the section, it would be sufficient to establish a simple representative organization such as a section council consisting of resident representatives who are simply selected by lottery regardless of the delegate licensing system.

2.3. Framework statute and common statute

The relationship between the central and local governments in a bourgeois state is essentially governed by a hierarchical relationship, even in a highly pure federal state like the United States. However, if that were the case, calling for local autonomy would end up being an empty phrase.

In contrast, the relationship between the central and local administration in a communist society is a perfect equal relationship. This is because there is a clear division of roles and duties between the central and local authorities. Therefore, the term "central" should not be used in principle, and should be strictly referred to as "general."

Specifically, the communes, reginal areas, provincial areas or quasi-zones in each zone can enact their own constitutional charter within the scope of the zone constitutional charter and enact their own statutes for affairs belonging to each , just as the zones can.

However, issues affecting the whole population are regulated by the statutes of the zone. Even in such a case, the zone statutes do not naturally prevail. Rather, "framework statutes" set a required standard for a common system throughout the zone while respecting local autonomy, and "common statutes" regulate the fields where a unified system throughout the zone should be enforced.

Of these, the framework stipulated by the framework statutes is the standard of the system that every local authorities within the zone should have as standard. Therefore, while each local authority must comply with the standards, it can introduce its own measures according to local conditions within or beyond the standards.

On the other hand, the common statute must be complied with by all local authorities within the zone, and is a compulsory law that does not allow local authorities to make their own amendments.

Which fields should be regluated by framework statute or common statute is a problem that must be individually and concretely considered. 

Typical examples include childcare and nursing care handled by communes, and regional medical care handled by regional areas, which should be covered by the framework statute. This is because, in the field of welfare, standard services that should be provided equally by all local authorities must be determined, but local authorities' own services should also be allowed according to the actual situation.

On the other hand, fields such as global environmental issues must be subject to common statutes that are authorized based on statutes enacted by the World Commonwealth (world laws). In addition, basic codes related to social order, such as civil law and criminal law, should also be common statutes, but this is not the case in the above-mentioned federal zone where each quasi-zone can enact its own civil and criminal laws.

On Communism:Page22

Esperanto  French  Spanish

Chapter 4: SKETCH OF COMMUNIST SOCIETY --  ADMINISTRATION

1. It is possible to abolish state as a political entity.

1.4. Commons' Convention System

The state that grabs taxes from the wages that we have finally earned while being exploited as wage serfs - from where we are also exploited for consumption - and then uses those taxes to use us in war. You might be tempted to exterminate such a monster now. But it is not so easy.

On this point, Marx and Engels, and later self-proclaimed communists, did not declare the abolition of the state, perhaps for fear of being confused with unpopular anarchists. Instead, they usually duck the issue by vague thesis such as "the death of the state."

However, since the state is not a living thing, it is not possible for it to wither and perish if we wait. In order to abolish the state, we must let go of the concept of the state itself and concretely present a new mechanism for social management that does not depend on the state. How, then, is it actually possible to abolish the state?

To put it straight to the conclusion, it is to create an institution that truly represents the people - this is the Commons' Convention mentioned in Chapter 2 in relation to the land issue - and position this institution as the sole administrative body.

The Commons' Convention is a social organization with a representative structure that differs from a parliamentary system or a political party organization. Its delegates are to be drawn by lottery - not by voting - from among citizens with a delegate license obtained through a public standardized examination. Moreover, since the Commons' Convention is not a government, it does not impose taxes or similar duties.

This communist social organization does not adopt the classic separation of powers familiar from textbooks: parliament, government, and courts.

According to the classical understanding, the separation of powers is a power distribution system to prevent dictatorship, but in reality it is a monstrous triumvirate like a three-headed dragon. In fact, even a single-headed dragon is more than enough for power.

In a Commons' Convention System, the governmental institutions that had become a many-headed dragon due to sectionalism will be completely abolished, and all institutions equivalent to today's central ministries and agencies will be converted into a kind of policy think tanks that report directly to the Commons' Convention.

However, if such an administrative organisation exists, it may be counter-questioned that it could be a body of power similar to the state.

Certainly, communism draws a clear line from anarchism. This is because, in order to maintain human society, it is impossible to deny the social norms of laws with coercive force and the administrative power based on laws. In that sense, even if the state-power is abolished, it does not mean that the legal-power is also abolished.

However, communist law and power are not "activated" from above through the body of power called the state, but "utilized" from below through the representative body of the Commons' Convention. The significance of the abolition of the state lies in this point.

In the traditional theory of the state, theses of democracy such as "popular sovereignty" and "government by the people" have been actively advocated, but they have ended up being mostly empty ones. The reason for it is that as long as the state is premised, sovereignty cannot escape being seized not by the people, but by the state itself—in other words, the politicians, bureaucrats, and military officers who control the state.

In contrast, the first principle of politics in true communism is that the common people, or the commons, are the leading role in society. It can be summarized as "commons' sovereignty," but in order to prevent this from ending up as an another empty thesis, we must establish a mechanism for the management of society without a state through the Commons' Convention.

1.5. Sublation of sovereign states

The abolition of the state will not be completed simply with the creation of the Commons' Convention. Sovereign states must be sublated in external relations as well. Rather, that is what should be preceded theoretically, but for the sake of argument, the details of this issue will be dealt with in the final chapter, so I will preempt it here to the extent necessary.

The sublation of sovereign states means that all the peoples will be freed from the cages of nation-states and will be subsumed into a world community called the World Commonwealth that binds the entire globe altogether. The World Commonwealth is a transnational administrative organization contracted by the World Commonwealth Charter, which can be said to be the "constitution of the earth."

Under this new world system, while being subsumed by the World Commonwealth, the people belong to each unit in the World Commonwealth called the zone, which retains relatively autonomous domain and is stipulated by its own charter (constitution) within the scope of the World Commonwealth Charter. However, unlike sovereign states, the zones cannot claim their exclusivity not only to other zones but also to the World Commonwealth.

Therefore, the term "domain" here is similar to, but different from "territory." It is a unit in which the entire population of the zone can exercise autonomous power of administration through the Commons' Convention of the zone, and its ultimate jurisdiction belongs to the World Commonwealth.

It is easy to understand that this World Commonwealth is a further deepening of the unity of today's United Nations, but it is a single integrated global organisation that goes beyond a mere union of sovereign states like the UN. It has a position as an world administrative organization, and when finally completed, it is designed to be responsible for a planned economy throughout the earth.

By the way, the World Commonwealth is completely different from the "World Federation" that has been advocated for some time. The "federation" will be regarded as a single state (federal state), and a federal government (world federal government) will also be created. However, since the World Commonwealth does not recognize a "state" in any sense, it should be clearly distinguished from the "World Federation."

Rather, in order to manage the World Commonwealth, especially economic cooperation, in a more decentralized and democratic way than today's UN, the world would be divided into several interconnected large regions - to be called "grand-zones" - and each of these would have its own Commons' Convention.

In any case, the true meaning of the abolition of the state is to sublate the conflicting interests between the existing sovereign states into a world community in this way.