The Non-Partisan Party
“The important thing for government is not to do things which individuals are doing already, and to do them a little better or a little worse; but to do those things which at present are not done at all.”
John Maynard Keynes – 1926
This is a collaboration of ideas, not a political stance! We are a “party” without affiliation. We want Disruptive Thinking in our political persuasions. No biases, no political bent and no association. Just good policies for everyone. We want everyone to be involved in the creation of and implementation of these policies. We want to strike the balance between what is good for you, and what is good for the country, regardless of politics. History is littered with failed attempts to control complex systems. Instead, we must seek understanding.
Only through understanding do we have any chance of harnessing the enormous potential the world possesses. And we cannot do this in the current partisan format of governance!
What is our Mission?
We are the party without affiliation. We want Disruptive Thinking in our politics. No biases, no political bent and no association. Just good policies for everyone.
How do we ensure the above remains true in the face of continued and renewed political pressure from such bodies as the media, the NHS, the government, the opposition, the banks, and all the other sectors?
By continually asking questions. We are asking the right questions to the right people, not the people with the most to gain in society.
With the ever increasing centralisation of the political elite in this country, we feel the best ideas for government, the best policies for the people and the best methods for implementation are being overlooked in favour of minority interests, fringe movements and political bias as implored by large business.
By connecting as many people together to make decisions, the ideas that appear at the top of the bell curve will generally be the ones most appropriate for the outcome. So, to start us off, the following questions need to be thought about.
Why is the quality of public debate so low?
And why does the quality deteriorate the more important the stakes get?
The United Kingdom is an island, but this type of thinking is becoming progressively limiting. Our future needs to consider the future of the globe, not just the UK or Europe, so we are aiming to stretch people’s thinking in order to see the bigger picture and thus take care of the future needs of our population, rather than the immediate needs of the ruling elite.
We need to prepare and manage total innovation and trust a new future will emerge from collaboration. Every level of government needs to be responsible for its role, as does every citizen.
Better governmental role alignment and clearly defined accountabilities will come out of better global policies for a future currently beset with limiting values.
How do we think about our political contribution in the UK right now? With all the in-fighting between member states, is it any wonder that we, as a population seem unable to move beyond our limited, self-interested perspectives and actually become a force for global change in a future that involves all tiers of society and all levels of thinking?
If you feel there is something missing in politics, and it is a non-political party with only human potential in mind, then join today!
How We Think About Politics
This is a direct copy of a research paper on complexity and political thinking. It is one idea of how we think about our political position. There are many ideological inputs and influences. If you are interested in the whole paper, click here paper.
“High complexity indicates that a decision-maker carefully weighs all the relevant perspectives on an issue and then integrates them into a coherent position. Low complexity, in contrast, indicates that only one viewpoint is considered, which is maintained with dogmatic tenacity. The pivotal role of cognitive complexity in political life has been demonstrated by ample research. For example, Tetlock (1983, 1984; Tetlock, Hannum, & Micheleti, 1984) observed significantly lower levels of complexity among politicians of minority parties than of majority parties.”
On this topic, please read this article in Psychology Today to gain a better understanding of HOW we think about politics.
Finally, when George Washington left office in 1796, he issued a warning to his successors and the nation as a whole:
However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
George Washington – 1796
Washington stressed unity (TNPP) and saw party loyalty as a detriment to democracy. The extent to which this has come – or will come – to fruition is still debated, but protests about the results of elections could arguably be an example of the party-over-nation scenario Washington foresaw.