POLITICAL CHANGE FOR SUSTAINABILITY

There is an immense emphasis on resolving the problems of the world though political evolution or revolution. Regardless of the different models created, there is always leaders and followers that flows out in circles. A key dilemma to this is that the empowerment advocated in these models centres around one icon that swoons the people to follow them. Our current model is no different, other than there are more icons to pick from. Despite the progressive bubble of leveraging connection and personal empowerment, the political global picture still enforces obedience to specific rues to follow, making them more convoluted and unnatural to follow, thereby leveraging disempowerment. Further, politics has become a tool for corporate dominion that attempts to gloss over this disempowerment through marketing support for ideas irrespective of the benefit of the masses, all because of profit measured by a global quantified measure: money.
We search for new political paradigms as the priority to make change. The possibilities of new models are endless, being it commoning, socialism, anarchy, and tribalism, open-participatory, to name a few. Many eschew the incompetence of capitalism without defining what it is in capitalism that is not respected. Is it ownership? A free market? What this illustrates is the focus on the objectivism of politics to drive change, not the components of political dogma and what benefits the most people, if not everyone.

We design politics around the story that human nature needs to be saved from itself — that our propensity for greed to overcome scarcity requires governance to empower humanity — but it is that we trust this story where the truth lays: we natively trust that others have our best interests at heart. This may contradict the empower frameworks of motivators, coaches, and startup culture; while they may decentralise agencies of accessing empowerment , they still fit within the box of corporatism, therefore profit through debt-based money. This opposes the abundant access to empowerment the world really wants to exercise, let alone the most unlimited parameters of that empowerment. We encase empowerment in current economic terms through business, who then gratefully feeds increasing disempowered society. This pattern is particularly poignant in the drug and mental health industries. It is also in startups whose main purpose now is the short-term valuation for a quick sell to larger companies. None of these practices drive status in creating sustainably. Instead, we are perpetuating commodity. Experiences are limited processes within the realms of capitalist societies. Instead of empowering with absolute paradigms, those that make the earth function, we empower within relative, man-made ones, incompatible with earth. This has happened from one civilisation to another, where many people are sacrificed for the few. We are not evolving:. we are becoming pawns in different clothes, but change little.

In kind, we become enslaved with decision-making around ethics, as our initial scarce and disempowering based frameworks demand compromise one way or another. This misses the bullseye for not asking where the dilemma to require ethics comes from: scarce-based thinking, global debt-based currencies, and the fear game theory we apply to human nature. And so the empower-disempower cycle continues. We think this is nature, but it’s the difficult, man-made, parameters we choose manifest self that make us think this cycle has meaning, and therefore ,make it real. The premise of what is the best decision is simply how empowering is it for the most people and Earth?. It is no more complicated than this, but we do because we think people want to take advantage of others to survive scarcity.

I propose a new model that evolves empowerment in connected fuzzy spirals, each spiral one being, following an exponential trajectory that diminutives disempowerment and leverages empowerment through connection and collaboration by default, negating the need for governing empowerment (what an oxymoron!). The model drives creating excellence sustainably, shifting ‘profit’ from focusing creating scarce commodity at a price to simply quality experiences that value people’s time and global resources through gifting, the profit being one’s incalculable reputation as a sustainable creator. We may think this is what we are doing now, but clearly this is not the case as the lower cost solutions to the masses never make the market.

This is why it is essential to adopt a new exchange mechanism, from quantitative to qualitative criteria. This must be deduced at a global scale even though solutions are applied as locally as possible. Such a political framework leverages status to align creation for self and others in the same direction, making ethics evolve to excellence. In the same way, it also makes the current oppositions of selfish (ego) and selfless make peace and align and collaborate towards the same direction: creating the best experiences for all that want it as sustainably as possible. Instead of limiting governance between the balance of those that want to empower and vice versa, I propose a balance between creativity v sustainability. This takes out any perceived advantage of identity through active disempowerment, or empowerment delivered scarcely, at a price.

It is not possible to leverage creating experiences sustainably, which is quality centric, with money, which is quantity-centric. We do our best to want change politically, morally, caring for our fellow man, within an exchange system that does not want this to happen, taking for granted that the debt-based exchange model itself cannot change. Cost on currency reduces the exchange mechanism of creation to a commodity itself, even though it is actually nothing. This believed parameter distorts the energy of exchange and devalues the sustainable quality that could have been created, focusing reputation from collaborative quality to competitive isolation, disempowering the synergy of connection along the way.
I will present the logic of empowerment through collaboration over competition, crowdfinding over crowdfunding, decision-making through excellence over ethics, reputation through creating quality experiences over quantified commodity, and the increased ROI through gifting sustainable creation abundantly over pricing it. The simplicity of currency parameters, and their social consequences, will also be explained, offering an effective absolute direction to work not just towards, but a new structure to connect, create, experience, and evolve from.

This has been said many times, by many icons, but the difference here is no one can own or control this model as the only goal, the only god, is Sustainability. This presents a whole new governing dynamics, as status is no longer mask of progress by a few to the many, but an empowered force creating connected diverse excellence that is their own property to distribute to whom they wish. As nature intended.

This is easily demonstrated in my proposing this model itself. It is not important that I am recognised myself for this specific mode, but that I am with others developing their own ways, within the same framework, for a solution. I gain more connecting with them than competing for my own brand. How can I say I am a mastermind when so many have known the problem for a long time, but did not find a successful solution to resolve it? All pioneers are built on legacy and innovation that has come before. We can rearrange them, but it is the parameters for how we choose to arrange them that makes the difference.

However we shy away from absolutes, it is at this edge where we are at most limitless: no economy can function compromising the environment, as history has shown. Master the resources of the environment all one wishes, but it must empower and cultivate all involved. Many icons are advocating for productive change, so let’s cultivate the vehicle that brings this synergy together and make a force that can empower our unlimited capacity to create experiences together for all. And that is happiness.

FOUNDATION OF THOUGHT
There are many compromised situations looking for support and change for a more connected,sustainable/regenerative economy. Climate change is an easy one to focus on, but there is also racism, ethical v profit centric business, pharmaceuticals, and the most critical: farming.

We look at new ways to leverage community empowerment and creation within bounds that compromised this in the first place. At least since the 70s, when awareness of our effect on environment reached worldwide attention, the powers that be were successfully selling greed less than a decade later, extolling that what we have is the life, and we have been living in the derivatives of this thought ever since. Even game changers slot into the commodity box with books to buy and documentaries to watch, without actually changing the engine, or offering productive solutions that can actually be acted on, except in small steps while we are all subsumed inside collapse, where we are today.

So, in this competition, I fear the same thing again: focusing on politics as the driver for change to overcome the ‘human condition’, that being we are fear driven animals. I suggest we are far more trusting than we give ourselves credit for. We value the quality of creation as a true standard of identity, and people more intrinsically motivated to create, especially more sustainably and with more connection, given the environmental/social standards for status to do so. While we can say that to change the scold we must change ourselves, we also need an environment to support that change. If it could have happened politically, it would have already happened. It hasn’t. It is more effective to look at the environment that politics works in, and in making political change, also change the environment to affect that change. This has never happened either.

Given the brevity of this application, and the usual unlike of absolutes, I plan to go back to first principles of what we want, and the core parameters of change to get there, political or otherwise. it is up to you if you want to think outside the box and ;leverage the change you want, or stick within political bounds and therefore, again, not change very much and do what everyone else does: make evolution and icon of commodity, and so evolve nothing. In all the systems we have created, we do work with absolutes anyway, so that is not the problem; it is more the foundation of those absolutes, and we have picked the most disempowering ones.

Please excuse the brevity of the argument given the word limits, but I hope it is enough to invite not just discussion, but new ways of application if an experiential sustainable future that perpetually empowers is what you want. I hope it is.
A new acquaintance and I had a discussion of his frameworks for change and I overlaid that with where I was coming from. He said at the end, after logically understanding all my points and how this improves his application for change, he felt ‘enlivened’. That’s half way there. Leverage that with action, and we are getting somewhere.

ABSTRACT
Let’s start with the absolutes.

1
Human nature natively trusts over fear.
Children, even university students, are excited to learn new things, to not just understand their environment but also to adapt for the greatest benefits of discovering self through expressing experiences over and over. Iteration, like startups. They understand very quickly if their environment is empowering or not, and how to survive in it.
Yes, children will explore leveraging either point of view, but if expression values collaboration and sharing over other experiments, they will focus in developing that, as everything that disempowers will be an increasing waste of time. This implies that as much as we can change ourselves, our environment can affect our direction; why how empowering an environment is so important.

2
We instinctively want to create.
We are not dormant animals that survive only to procreate. It could be concluded that we certainly complicate that journey, but ultimately it is how we create that differentiates who we are, and therefore how suitable we are as mates. This is extremely general, but it does not negate how much we generally do to look good to the opposite sex.
We do not need to be motivated to create, except when we come from a place of disempowerment and do not know how to get out of it. Latching onto extrinsic motivational tactics makes a journey to empowerment easier, but without autonomy, it is a false path. I refer you to the work of Dr Richard Ryan and Self Determination theory to illustrate scientifically out native intrinsic nature to create.

3
Happiness for all of us, every human being on earth, is being supported to be empowered to create.
We assume that people are equally happy when they want to disempower, but this is a form of weakness, from not being in a position to be empowered, losing hope, and therefore seeing no other option to express self.
No self expands by actively disempowering as a priority: weakness, compared to inevitable disempowerment options in exploring new journeys creating experiences sustainably: limitation. It is only through leveraging empowerment, for self, others, and earth — synergy — do we expand, explore, and discover self.

4
The best decision is based on how many people are empowered to create in the most sustainable way possible.
The premise behind this is excellence as the driver of decision making, by default incorporating ethics. When we make decisions prioritising ethics, it infers compromise, basing itself on scarcity of some sort. Even more important, it disempowers inclusive decision-making, taking power away from people to leverage their greatest empowerment.
Decision making focused on excellence is ethical, and inclusive, by default. The highest excellence must leverage empowerment without compromise, creating the best as sustainably as possible. Doing less than the best is not excellent. It is with this framework that politics can make the best decisions for the most people while respecting environmental limitations.

5
Status shifts from accumulation of possessions — bulk — to access to experiences — power/weight ratio.
In valuing sustainability over money, it becomes apparent that the best measure of status is in how experiences are created, to the point of no longer being needed or until a new innovation takes redundant. This is actively looked for, as wasting time making less than the most efficient in effect wastes human life and earth’s resources; this is not sustainable. This shifts status from qualitative exchange to quality creation. If there is any connection to abundance we can make in a free market, this is the closest way to it.

6
Sustainability and debt-based money do not achieve abundance, and are not connected in any way.
Above all, even compared to defence and energy infrastructure, the most resource-sapping sector in all life is money. Fighting for a price, limiting free-market to quantities over quality, is a disaster for resource management, and the derivatives of action based on fear created from this, defence costs the epitome of this.

This also undermines political decision making to empower, instead beaconing a pawn of the money system, which is evidently apparent. Brands are becoming the new culture creators, changing resilience towards commodity accumulation, ultimately making ourselves a commodity that fits inside infrastructure we have no synergy of control over. Look at how fashion is created and sold. The waste is incredible, across all industries, including start-up, coaching, and motivation culture. I can expand on this concept later if you wish. There is no space here, but look around and it is obvious.
Debt-based currency only works in leveraging scarcity. It also makes money a commodity, and energy, in itself, not a mechanism to transfer energy. Therefore, it takes energy away from what is truly created to support quality of life, not an energy to fulfil it. The examples are clearly obvious, otherwise this competition would not be happening, but the most obvious example is with food. Any exchange model that puts farmers on the bottom of the pyramid, not top, compromising the nutrition and diversity of what they do, is natively wrong. Nature thrives on diversity to not just survive and evolve.

Our social structures are taking out diversity, disempowering the environment to do otherwise, leaving diverse choices only for the few who can economic afford it, for as long as this is possible. It is imperative that if we are to do what we love and drive status in creating this sustainably, it cannot happen within the confines of a commodity-driven currency that values scarcity and obsolescence without innovation to evolve it.

7
Any solution must have global influence, but be driven locally, as culture demands.

Culture is an extension of nature to experience. While they evolve unique to the area, there is always a common absolute that drives them, dependent on the beliefs they derive from.

Tribally, they have been based around overcoming scarcity and growing in numbers to survive. With the object of dominion has been the key to this, civilisations have soared. Built in the glory of bulk, however, and dominion over others, they have all fallen. We take this for granted as a normal inevitability of human greed, and that greatness is only for the few. Even if this is the case, it is the parameters of how greatness is achieved that afford how well we realise our own greatness, in our own way, but always grounded in synergy with others, empowering they as much as self. This transcends owning bulk to distributing experiences, ultimately basing status on what is truly abundant: reputation.

FOUNDATION OF FRAMEWORK FOR SUSTAINABLE CHANGE
If politics is to truly create change, incentive must be created for it to shift from being the commodities they are to a process machine to empower, leveraging people to create experiences in synergy as sustainably as possible.
The excellence in achieving this objective will invite sharing knowledge, connection, and collaboration by default, drive the greatest efficiency is creative capacity, and move business to a customised production on demand protocol, in essence making business run like sport (compete to be the best, but support each other in the learning of this together) and create unique pieces: art.

The word ‘consumer’ will be obsolete, with people identifying more with being ‘evolvers’ through creating, giving and receiving experiences that leverage empowerment and self-discovery. Instead of people fighting to be supported to create, they can now afford to practice what they wish, with respect to self and who they connecting with. ‘Human resources’, so to speak, now have the greatest capacity be useful, rather than being limited to quantified exchange protocols.

Unlike many models driving efficient resource management, an unregulated free market is supported, as reputation will demand respect for all and self, not based on an external moral belief, but in one’s own search for excellence. Status shifts from what one has (bulk), to what one does with what one has (sustainable efficiency); from quantity (commodity) to quality (experiences). The authenticity of whatever these experiences is paramount, as no one needs to, ultimately, sell themselves to a price.

Lastly, in the same way that the IMF is trying very hard to make their debt-driven SDR the ultimate currency for all nations (which would be a complete disaster), UN2 instead will propose an implement a cost-free currency, one that has no fees or interest. If money is to be borrowed, only the principle is to be paid back. One wins loans for how their projects leverage experiences sustainability. Competing entities in the same space connect to diversify together, not apart. And so, also, there is no identity manifest in disempowering, wasting resources, or power without merit.

There is an immense shift for people to express their empowerment by wanting to exercise their creative capacity, across all disciplines, above anything else, in the most collaborative and connected way possible. Any action must encourage this, as there is no more sustainable way to create.

The UN2 will be defined by how it addresses empowering creating experiences over commodity as innovative and sustainably as possible through models that leverage education, through inclusive, excellence-based decision making — the highest form of ethics for people and Earth — to empower the most people in both short-term and long-term forecasting. This invites collaborating and sharing knowledge to be sustainable as possible, making reputation in creating the sustainably the new profit.

DESCRIPTION OF THE MODELS
It is extremely hard for any political entity, even a UN, to take a stand against other political paradigms that are against empowerment and leverage scarcity. It will certainly not happen on moral grounds. This by default disempowers and externalises control. Whose morals? Even if it makes common sense, what about the minutiae that can and does get in the way? This is like how to define the UBI. It’s impossible and wastes a huge amount of time, especially within a debt-based currency.

It is only through excellence where people can be included and supported in a positive direction. Self-excellence without leveraging the excellence of others is not excellence. In the same way, economic or political sustainability is impossible without respecting environment. Trying to is not excellence. Make sense? This is not a relative argument. It’s another absolute to accept. Again why current debt currency models do not work.

It is important that UN2 is promoting collaboration as the most efficient way to value sustainability, and create a value system that can the status in doing this. The UN2 can set an example on the ground leveraging empowerment in increasing a sustainable quality of life, and showing this as an example for other political entities to not just take notice, but afford the tools to implement them. Status to innovate would demand to follow, or show being threatened and fight, which would only transparently show the weakness of the latter.

These are the points the UN2 would address in defining its landmark identity, and ways to action them. I will start with simpler ideas and move to more complex ones:

8
Focus on creative over political

Politics will never change anything while it is focused on centralised, ethical, power. It is how such entities leverage their creative capacity that will ensure its longevity to guide. It must create the structure to afford this to happen if it is to be an example for other countries to follow.

The key to establish status in this way is how well it demonstrates synergy of creating experiences in the most sustainable way. In a free market, this will always be fuzzy, but this is the nature of discovery and diversity while still being connected to Earth’s resources and ecosystems. This is the core nature of integrated empowerment: sustainable synergy.

The advantages of this must be marketed, not for morals or virtues, which hardly work in themselves, but on foundations of excellence and discovering the best expression of one’s identity in synergy with others. So much commodity is sold on this perceived pretext, so why not do this in a productive way to promote a new qualitative profit paradigm for status and empowerment: creating experiences as sustainably as possible. No doubt this will attract a huge amount of interest and support irrespective of the money involved. Personally, it is that it will not be paid that will give it more attention, as the status in playing a part in leveraging creating sustainable experiences at such an influential scale would be astronomically cool.

9
Leverage education to empower through intrinsic motivation.

This is much more than simply accessing education for its own sake, and certainly more than education in what has been done already and to simply do it. Call it creative education, or CEd.

People spend a lot of time being educated in something but not in a position to work in that field, or not being inspired to excel in it — obedience over reason — ultimately being disempowered by it.

The UN2 can implement mutual exchange systems where people can practice their inherent interests freely for a period of time in a participants interests , not just offering education in an industry to work within it, but asking and implementing feedback to understand how, and implement, what people would like to change in participating for collaborative change.The most sustainable synergetic of them will be chosen as this will benefit and empower the most people.

There are many mutual exchange models that exchange services and barter and such, but their traction is limited mainly due to the limited quality of exchange and limited scope of choice. There is usually still an emphasis on commodity, not the type of commodity people hope to see in such a liberating system. The best qualitative exchange example I have seen is Freeworlder www.freeworlder.com. It is in essence a social media framework for offering and asking what one would like, therefore invites being transparent in that space. Further, there is no danger for data information to be sold, et al, other than to freely inform interested parties what is available to be created, again valuing the sustainability of such projects if they are to receive any support.

10
Leverage reputation creating sustainably as the sole ‘profit’ measure.
It is in this space where the biggest culture shifts will occur. I call this shifting from a crowdfunding to a crowdfinding mindset.

Many resources are locked up in competitive markets as all economic cultures are effectively overcoming scarcity, contrived or otherwise, thereby having to own resources to produce commodities. Obsolescence and over production wastes many of these, making the world a toxic refuge or wasteland. However we try to address this, we never look at the parameters of shifting culture, only looking at changing culture itself; the wrong bullseye.

In shifting resources to more collaborative, more sustainable frameworks, the initial sharing network can be extended to industries, asking for support to improve their sustainability reputation. If that support is given for free, obsolete product, even the resources themselves that would have created same, can be given in return. This is more to do with leveraging experience creating over commodity to sell. Communities receiving such resources will also acknowledge industry participants for thinking outside the box. This also improves profit margins for industry participants when selling to the competitive market affording debts to be paid off sooner.

Business planning has the opportunity to shift from a profit-citric, commodity focused entity driving for valuation towards truly long-term customised sustainable production on demand. This changes the focus of a business from the fear of succeeding against others to greater opportunity collaborating with others, being supported by an extended professional family, competing in some ways, but always shaking hands in gratitude for the experience of the day and looking forward to a new day tomorrow. It also promotes the art of business to work in synergy creating and experimenting with new experiences to perpetually evolve, emphasising that the best experiences promote self-discovery, empowerment, and joy of life.

As this attracts more exposure, more resources become more available in the collaborative market, leveraging higher diverse creativity and production on demand protocols. The increased capacity for people to practice what they truly want, in connection with others, not against them, will make this option .increasingly attractive as opportunities to be supported in this model increases.

11
Leverage a Cost-Free Currency
The most powerful thing the UN2 can do is implement and leverage a new global, cost-free, currency. This will directly compete with the IMF with such global exposure that will make such a move impossible to ignore. Addressing this focuses game theory and currency games, showing effectively how the perceptions of these specific games affect social behaviour, and resolve a way to align them towards status creating sustainably.

Concisely, there are as many trust-related games as there are fear-based ones. The driver for decision-making is more how the parameters of the game are delivered; affecting what the status quo would do. They are not unbiased experiments, the same way quantum theory understands participating in a situation affects the outcome completely. It is the parameters from how an experiment is derived that make the difference, not the experiment itself.

Currency games are not new either, but again it comes down to parameters from where the games come from. In unlimited scope games, ideas outside of debt-driven currency can be explored, of which a few people venture. Basic parameters are forgotten in its debt based development of history, and the consequences of that, as David Graebar’s book ‘Debt: The First 5000- Years’, illustrates. There is no choice but to look at new exchange models outside centralised debt ones we use now, at scale, and look at effects across civilisations.

This is a quadrant analysis for what currencies best fit certain political paradigms:

Even as subjective as this may be specifically, in general it is an acceptable representation. How many people are doing what they love in the capitalism we practice today? Are we truly in a free market if cultures are conforming and corporations are holding dominion over resources so essential to life? Who are the people that continue to support this dominion despite knowing that it can affect their own survival, or are they assured of being safe in accessing such resources? Against who? For how long?

All of these questions centre on not just the economics we follow, but the exchange model that drives it. a cost-free currency is a strong way forward to shift status from a scarce-driving commodity model that wastes an immense amount of time and resources, much of it in market making, to an abundance-creating experience model that includes all and self creating then highest quality in synergy with all. Profit, or status, if you will, shifts from ownership at will to reputation at the capacity of creating sustainable efficiency. This is completely culture and location dependent; whatever makes the greatest, empowered, happiest people. Some may have universal names, others only known to a tribe, but all work together leveraging starting experiences. The new god to establish identity will not be money, but sustainability.

12
Leverage the Highest Ethic: Creating Excellence Sustainably

For this type of empowerment to occur, there would be a need, and desire, for a transparent platform to exchange information. This would be freeworlder.com coming to fruition: exchanging the power to create excellence in sync with others. What was status in conflict of differences now becomes critic of how good a sustainable creator we are, and if there is a need or desire to connect. Only excellence can do this: extending ethics without limits of fear.

Reputation, the status quo. will demand, by default, to not look at people as weak for any other reason than the lack of will to create.; Everyone else is a friend not met. Those who cannot create are only friends to come.

This changes the voting structure from hierarchical to peer-driven. We may all have different experience and opinions for what may be best, but only those who understand the best way to do something will not just want to do it, but will work together to do it. Projects are only put forward if there is a sustainably efficient need for it, otherwise there is no point. They are not for their on sale to drive a money economy, but an environmentally, sustainable, experiential one.

By default, in the interests of sustainable efficiency, voting decides on possible projects and for why they would benefit the most people.

FLOW-ON OF THESE CHANGES
There is an incredible emphasis on commodifying everything, to split into pieces and fit into boxes, ultimately disempowering in the fitting into the box, selling, in essence, empowerment within a debt-driven exchange model, which is why addressing this fundamental is so important.

Scarce-creating money drives fear and ownership. This is not sustainable. Reputation is abundant. So is imagination. These are the tools for creative experiences and making life amazing. Exchange in service to this; not the other way around.

In kind, the conflicts we currently face and aim to settle on ethical frameworks are far more easier to resolve. Shifting the status paradigm to a fully qualitative one, and adapting the exchange model to supper that, affords an environment to support changing self inline with nature, which is as excellent as it can be. This never stops changing, but it does happen in synergy.

We can complain all we wish about population or taxes or compromising projects, of different people we do not understand. These conflicts become redundant and are a waste of energy in sustainably-focused social structures. There will be as many as there are different lands to be in synergy with, and what we learn from.

The greatest gift in this new system structure is that a qualitative exchange model, or at least a quantitative comparison model based on sustainability, cannot be owned by anyone and never can be. No one’s idea of sustainability can be ultimate, only comparisons to connect to only make better still.

Given the sustainable efficiency possible, and the tech capacity experience-centric way to achieve these, there is no doubt that there will be social preferences that will become the foundation of sustainable experience-centric communities. By default, again, people will want to connect more deeply, therefore create more deeply, earn more deeply, all in the pursuit of discovering self. Therefore, any governance is creative-centric, not as a commodity but as experience. Having becomes doing. There is no moral umbrella to make this work. It is the excellence in creating sustainably in synergy that drives it, with as little compromise as possible.

Perhaps the word sustainable and just make synergy the ultimate goal, if that illustrates the point better.
The greatest gift in this model is that there is no gain in owning the model; it cannot be owned. And comparisons of differing views of sustainability are dependent on support by relevant communities involved. Nothing is created until there is consent to the value of it being done, and that is done well, to last and evolved and/or to be recycled in the future for new innovations as they are arise.

This is inherently fuzzy but far more efficient and empowering than what any debt-based money can achieved.
Above all else, this modelling disempowers any need to want power over others, only power with others. Any other option has no weight or purpose. And it is here where we mobile joy over fear. There is no political entity that would want more.

SUMMARY
No political change will happen without changing the exchange mechanism we use to one that incentivises collaboration, leverage sharing knowledge, and align supporting empowerment in self and others.

Human nature is inherently good, so governance must serve this joy, the strongest, not fear, the weakest. That we do only empowers the weak. This is obvious. That we value both empowerment and disempowerment as ethics is a weakness. Shift status to the results of empowerment, and disempowerment has no where to go by default.

Time and resources are scarce, but creativity, imagination, innovation are unlimited. The right balance to drive quality to a price, but quality to sustainability. This shifts from owning commodity to accessing experiences. The latter values empowered self-expansion, the former disempowers this by externalising identity. I am looking at this globally, so I must address all cultures, not just Western civilisation.

This also synergies production to connect together in a synthesised web to use resources to their best efficiency. It values reusing instead of using new resources. Business models work towards their death once their efficiency is exhausted, therefore become the servant to creating sustainably, not money.

The ROI of qualitative exchange, creating sustainability and gifting on demand, is far greater than ROI of debt-based money. The crossover is a cost-free currency to see this relationship as it stabilises and can even deflate pricing as it becomes universally used.

It is easy, and connect with, creating on top of infrastructures we forget were created by others. We value entertainment sectors as the highest accolade and forget the scientists, the farmers, the builders. Focusing on creating sustainably, not money, returns status to the art of science, of aesthetic with purpose and depth. Beauty, and identity, return to the creator within, in connection with others. This is very normal, but money as we know it will never achieve this.

All these changes happen as they leverage a creative economy, not a political one. All frameworks come from leveraging strength and supporting weakness, not treat them as opposites. Therefore only the weak that want to stay that way, that want the strong to work FOR them, won’t like this, but does support those with weaknesses to work WITH them, to be as strong as they can be.

The endgame is leveraging peace to create as sustainably as possible. Conflict becomes constructive, not destructive. And we finally learn to live empowering joy, without compromise. This is the start game, not the endgame.

ANSWERING CRITERIA
I believe how this addresses criteria already made relevant in the model itself, as I am looking at the parameters that shift how it addresses criteria to they being addressed why default, that being there is no status doing anything less than not just what the criteria want, which is vey civil, to a creative empowered interest in doing exactly what your criteria ask for, and more.

If it is not self-evident, I hope this helps.

13
Core Values
For all people to achieve happiness: being supported to create as sustainably as possible.
To share education, disempower any disempowered feelings, and taking out any advantage feeling any negative feelings.
To evolve out of moral decision making to excellence, with parameters that define excellence as empower self, all, and Earth, as sustainably as possible.

To give true meaning to what is created, therefore getting back to depth, meaning, and not wasting energy.
Exercise our true human nature: to connect, learn, co-create. Any child or imaginative uni student will present.
When one takes out money as the driver for creation, creating commodity to obsolescence, and makes it sustainability, creating experiences in synergy, we evolve discovering and expressing self. How well we do this in synergy is how we define who we are.

14
Decision Making Capacity
Politics is invited to look at more long-term, empowering, resource centric decisions around excellence, that afford, and support people to help themselves. The latter does not happen without external support, but it does allow the journey not to be owned except by oneself: being attached and detached at the same time.

This modelling does not support governance being an entity in itself, but define itself by what it does in supporting creating in synergy. The status of all people involved demands this to be the case, without compromise.
Decision making is transparent and understood for the greatest goal: creating as much empowerment for all people, as their cultures warrant.

15
Effectiveness
The ROI for leveraging empowerment sustainably is a no-brainer. It also shows governance is owned by nothing else that creating synergy with earth, as best as can be presented.
It affords status in changing lifestyles in creating synergy with earth, as best as can be presented in different localities.
It allows people who are sustainable innovators to practice, connect, and be the icons of service to Earth, they should be,
It affords news of business to gain support for a long-term game, not be reduced to short-term valuation cycles.

16
Resources and Financing
Changing the exchange model will definitely reframe what is financed. This would be the quickest mean for change, as made evident with ICO markets everywhere. For the UN to do this would be incredible to bring attention to the power currency change can make.
Affords resources to shift to more collaborative free-markets while price is necessary. Takes out the commodity of money and makes the energy exchange currency is meant to me more exact.

17
Trust and Insight
Builds trust and transparency by default, in others and self by its incentive to create sustainably. Inevitable to increase one’s reputation.

18
Flexibility
While creating sustainably in synergy is totally rigid, how to do it is completely flexible. Earth is not the same in every place, as aren’t people. The best sustainable ideas empowers the most people in enjoying their lives being, expressing, connecting, however this transpires, but status will not allow anything to drive disempowerment. This does not mean disempowerment cannot be explored, but it is seen for the lack of synergy it is.
I mentioned sustainability is fuzzy. It is. At least the ideas that are best supported can be tested for the true benefits, not biased to other things.

It is a culture diversifier, as nature is. This is why nature is so amazing. Anyone see Voyage of Time? It is like Earth is a biological machine. Anything that devolves this is stupid.

19
Protection Against Abuse of Power
There is no anchor in this model to warrant abuse. There is no gain as abuse drives fear. This is a joy, empowering, happiness based protocol. Abuse signifies the opposite, and therefore has no weight. Any disputes for decisions or unhappiness can be resolved by transparency of decision making in driving sustainable synergy. Resolutions in practice are dependent on who supports what, and competing collaboratively to see what works best, as that is the most sustainable route. Destructive conflict has not place here. Ever.

20
Accountability
This is se-dfriven, as the parameters for social status afford participating creating, or creating alone, but invites UNJUDGED connecting. And even if people want to be alone, that is fine, although this is usually a learned response to trauma of some sort.

There is no advantage judging on ego, only defining to empower.

A web portal offers total transparency with what people do, as this also incites what people want to do and do it well. There is no need for oversight as this synergies empowerment, connection, and reputation.
And so I hit my breaking point, 2 days before my birthday and I write this to ‘win’a competition. Sometimes artists ned to stop thinking, breathe, and feel something. Or nothing.

I haven’t even followed the format, so it is not going to follow your crtieria, and can’t because I can’t fit in your box. I know I have not specified exact detail in one process for the UN to shift to in its present form, because politics will not change anything if you do not change the status measure it can be valued by.

But where processes go, the direction to follow where peace can be a driving force for creation, I hope I have illustrated that. If you really want change, if you really want a direction to follow along. then one has to look at the end point for where the change is going. It is not the commodity of empowering the UN, it is the direction and scope for what and why out is worth empowering for. WITHOUT PARADIGM LIMITS! This is why status in sustainability is so important, why EXCELLENCE is in this is so critical.

You are, or are representing, a Swedish billionaire, and I am entering a competition for money advocating how to disempower it, as it needs to be if you want unlimited change outside a box. This is beyond ego as usually define it. It is a whole new place of being, but it won’t happen politically within the current absolutes we think are real. They are not.
I know I, we, can do far more without the money if we have the belief pattern to drive, but I am not talking about faith. This is about rediscovery. For all. Without compromise. That is the end goal, nothing less. How we get there is the journey of which I hope I have offered some frameworks to go with. I had to address the paradigms first.

If you get how insignificant debt currency is for change, and I win, so to speak, your ‘$5m’ will buy such more for the world than you can possibly imagine. I am not talking about dream cities, I am talking about empowering creation and sharing knowledge. That’s really immense. I could not give you less if this is what I see.

If I was to use your money for anything now, today, it would just to buy a home in Coogee, today, for my best friend and her family, because no one has a higher integrity and honour than her for being. I can change the world around that for free. I can’t buy one for her. I am on a pension. Not being able to give her this is my greatest tragedy.

Among all this, I am almost crying while I listen to this the tune Undiscovered Colors, which I only found tonight in my music library. It is a novel in 4 minutes.

I have not followed your format, so I expect nothing, but I hope it is useful for you to find the direction you are looking for.
I wish you well.