In March 2024, Carl Higbie, the host of a news analysis television program for Newsmax, spent 9 minutes complaining about the incompetent and corrupt American government, but he had no explanation for why the government is so awful.

A month later, in April 2024, Eva Vlaardingerbroek, a woman from Netherlands, gave a 12 minute speech at CPAC Hungary 2024. After pointing out that a "corrupt elite" are bringing migrants into Europe who are committing a lot of crimes, and that white people have become a minority in Rotterdam, London, Brussels, and other cities, she asks:

Those two people are just two examples of the billions of people who realize that our governments are corrupt, but they don't offer any methods of reducing the corruption because they cannot explain why the governments are corrupt.

As pointed out in other documents, the governments are incompetent and corrupt because the voters continuously elect incompetent and corrupt candidates. However, every voter refuses to believe that he is partly responsible for the corrupt government.

We are so arrogant, and we have such a strong craving to be the world's leader, that we resist the possibility that we are incompetent voters. We want to believe that we make excellent decisions about who to elect, so we blame the corrupt government on other people or foreign nations, rather than blame ourselves, our family members, and other voters for being incompetent. However, the vast majority of people are incompetent as voters for such reasons as:

	1)	They want to entertain themselves during their leisure time, not analyze candidates and government officials. They want to play, not work.
	2)	They are easily outsmarted by intelligent criminals.
	3)	They want to mimic their peer group rather than think for themselves. Many of them will vote for whoever their political party recommends.
	4)	They are attracted to candidates who titillate them with praise and promises, which makes it easy for dishonest candidates to become popular.
	5)	They vote for "the lesser of the evils" when they don't like any of the candidates.
	6)	They are so convinced that they are super geniuses that they want candidates who have the same opinions about abortion, marijuana, Nazis, terrorists, religion, and other issues. They assume anybody with a different opinion is an idiot.

We can improve the government to a certain extent by altering the election system, such as by making it more difficult for criminals to cheat when counting the votes, but the only way to bring about significant improvements to the government is for the voters to make better decisions about which candidate to elect.

Since it is impossible to improve the brains of the voters, the only way the voters will do a better job is if we restrict voting to the few people who have demonstrated an excellent ability to select leaders.

This is a very simple concept, and almost every adult and teenager has the intellectual ability to understand how it works with medical doctors, plumbers, carpenters, and computer programmers. For example, if we want excellent medical advice, we must restrict the doctors to people who have demonstrated an above average understanding of medical problems. If we want excellent carpentry work, we must restrict the carpenters to people who have exceptional carpentry talent.

Almost everybody also has the intelligence to understand that the only way we can get better government officials to restrict voting to people who can do better job than the majority of people, but most people refuse to believe that concept because they don't want to believe it.

Most people want to believe that they, their friends, and their family members are super educated, super geniuses who make excellent decisions about selecting government officials, and determining the nation's policies on crime, marijuana, abortion, immigration, and raising children.

Our culture must be designed for the emotional, intellectual, and physical characteristics of a species of ape. Otherwise we will create customs that are unnatural, awkward, or inefficient.

An election system is a cultural tool that is analogous to a sieve that we use to sift sand, except that it sifts people for the purpose of providing us with government officials.

The existing election systems were designed for a fantasy creature that was created by a supreme being. Six of the reasons that these election systems are inappropriate for humans are:

Democracies expect candidates for government positions to travel around the nation to meet with and speak to the voters. Our modern nations are too large for the candidates to meet more than a small percentage of the voters, so they must supplement the traveling with advertisements and interviews on television, radio, and the Internet. Arranging for all of the travel and interviews is so time-consuming that a candidate must hire a group of people to help him, and the financial burden is so extreme that almost every candidate needs a large group of people to help him get financial assistance.

If a business required job candidates to spend phenomenal amounts of time and money to travel around the nation and advertise himself, nobody would apply.

Candidates are likely to be emotionally abnormal.

The candidates have to go through such a time consuming, frustrating, difficult, and expensive process to get elected that most people refuse to become a candidate. A person needs an intense craving to become a government official in order to be willing to go through that process, but are the people with such cravings "mentally healthy"?

We do not yet know much about human behavior, but this Constitution is based on the assumption that the only people willing to become candidates in such an unpleasant election system are those who are "emotionally defective".

Specifically, they are people with such intense cravings for status and wealth that they are willing to torment themselves and their family with the election process.

When those people are elected to government, they will want to satisfy their intense cravings for status and wealth, which means they will spend their time arranging for opportunities to be the center of attention, trying to eliminate competitors and critics, and having photos and statues of themselves placed around the nation.

Democracies are based on the theory that the majority adults can make intelligent decisions about which candidate should be elected, but the majority of people cannot make intelligent decisions about any issue because the majority of people will always have "average" intellectual and emotional characteristics, and half of the population will always be below-average.

The only way a group of voters will provide us with good leadership is to pass judgment on everybody's mental abilities, and restrict voting to the small percentage of people who show excellent abilities to select leaders.

Animals do not choose their leaders. Instead, the animals fight each other for dominance, and they become submissive to whichever animals are above them in the hierarchy, regardless of how they became dominant, and how they behave as a leader.

Animals do not look critically at the animals that are above them in the hierarchy. Instead, they are submissive to them.

Voting must be restricted to the people who can suppress their craving to become submissive to their leaders.

Humans inherited those characteristics. As a result, we can look critically at people we don't like, and who are lower in the social hierarchy, but we resist looking critically at the people we regard as our leaders.

As with the animals, we become submissive to whoever we regard as our leaders, regardless how abusive or worthless they are.

When I was a teenager, I assumed that the government officials were incompetent because most of the voters were the stupid people rather than the intelligent people, but analyses of voters always show that the people who are most likely to vote are those who are of above-average in intelligence, education, and wealth. Therefore, we cannot accuse the voters of being stupid or ignorant.

The only way to explain the idiotic decisions of voters is because the people resist using their intelligence to analyze and choose government officials. They prefer to make decisions that are emotionally pleasing, just like the stupid animals.

Most voters are as passive as single, female animals

A person needs more than intelligence and education in order to become an effective voter. He also needs a certain personality. For example, he must have the desire to analyze the leadership abilities of government officials and candidates, and he must have enough self-control to resist the emotional craving to become submissive to his leaders so that he replace the leaders who are incompetent or abusive.

Instead of analyzing the leadership abilities of the candidates, voters wait for candidates to titillate them, like a female bird waiting to be titillated by a male.

However, most voters follow their animal cravings to be passive observers of the people who fight for leadership. This causes voters to choose political candidates in a manner that is similar to how female animals choose a male.

The females of certain social animals, such as humans and birds of paradise, select a mate by going to a location where there are males, passively waiting for one of the males to titillate them.

Most voters also passively wait for people to become political candidates, and then the voters passively wait for one of the candidates to titillate them. Unfortunately, the easiest way to titillate the voters is to do idiotic things, such as give them praise; promise to do whatever they ask for; kiss their babies; and smile at them.

The passive voters encourage candidates who are neurotic, selfish, aggressive, deceptive, and dishonest. In order to provide ourselves with better leadership, the voters must have an attitude that is similar to that of the executives of a corporation. When corporate executives need to hire a person for a top management position, they are more actively involved in finding candidates for the job, and they are more actively involved in analyzing the candidates. They do not behave like single women who passively wait for people to come to them and titillate them.

Furthermore, when corporate executives dislike all of the job candidates, they do not pick the "lesser of the evils". Rather, they continue to look for somebody who can do the job properly.

Many voters complain that they don't have good choices, and they are forced to pick between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump in 2024. However, the voters are not forced to pick between Harris or Trump. They can vote for anybody they please. They could even vote for "New Candidates".

These sheep in China walked around in circles for 12 days.

However, most voters would not vote for "New Candidates" unless most people in their peer group were doing that, but the people in their peer group will not do it because they are also following their peer group. Each of them follows the others, and so they end up going nowhere.

Most people behave like the sheep in the photo to the right. They do not have the initiative, courage, or desire to explore their options, think for themselves, or change their path in life.

In order for us to get better leadership, we must pass judgment on everybody's intellectual and emotional characteristics, and restrict voting to the small percentage of people who show an above-average initiative to take an active role in analyzing candidates; replacing incompetent government officials; and demanding the arrest of dishonest officials.

All existing cultures insist that voting is such a simplistic task that everybody can produce an excellent analysis of the candidates and government officials during their leisure time. Two problems with that theory are:

1)		We want entertainment, not work. Animals do work only when they have to, such as when they are hungry or frightened. When they have nothing to do, they tend to lounge or play with each other. Likewise, humans prefer to lounge or play when we are not under pressure to work. We have a craving to eat food, compete for status, and have sex, but we don't have any craving to analyze candidates, government officials, or the problems of a modern society. Therefore, unless voters are under pressure to analyze those issues, they will avoid putting much time or effort into it.
2)		Intelligent decisions require time and effort. Although we can create an analysis of any issue within a few seconds, our analyses tend to improve as we put more time and effort into them, and when we get constructive criticism from other people. Therefore, in order for voters to make better decisions about candidates and government officials, they must be under pressure to put a lot of their time and effort into the analyses. We cannot expect voters to provide intelligent analyses when they spend only a few moments of their leisure time thinking about the issues.

This Constitution requires voting to be a full-time job, and the voters are required to routinely provide analyses of government officials and their policies. This will pressure the voters into putting a tremendous amount of time and effort into providing us with intelligent analyses of our government and culture.

The concept of a full-time voter who produces analyses of the government officials is bizarre to the existing cultures, but there are already people around the world who work full time analyzing political and social issues. They are referred to as analysts, advisors, or investigative journalists. However, none of those people are held accountable for anything they say, and this allows them to get away with promoting propaganda and working with Zionist and other crime networks.

By comparison, this constitution holds the voters accountable for everything they do, and does not provide them with any secrecy. Furthermore, each voter must be an independent person, rather than a member of a political party or other organization.

A democracy and a free enterprise system are based on the concept that each person will do whatever is best for themselves and their family, and that when a large group of people are behaving in such a selfish manner, the majority of them will magically create a government and an economy that is best for all of them.

This concept was practical for prehistoric people. For example, when they bartered for material items, each person selfishly did whatever was most beneficial to himself and his family, and in the process they created a functional economic system. There is evidence that the Europeans and Asians thousands of years ago were trading tools, furs, tin, and other items with one another without any laws, government regulations, labor unions, written language, receipts, accountants, or money.

The free enterprise system is an excellent system for primitive people. However, our modern societies are so complex that we need to be much more organized, and we need to be concerned with how we affect the lives of other people. It is no longer practical for each of us to selfishly do whatever we please.

The people who are authorized to vote must consider what is best for society, not what is best for themselves and their family. The voters must be analogous to the personnel department of a business. The people in the personnel department look for employees who will be beneficial to the team; they do not hire people according to what they selfishly want.

When businesses want to hire an employee, they look for an independent person, not a member of an "economic party", but most voters want to join a political organization, and elect a member of their organization. They don't want to be individual voters who vote for individual citizens. Just like sheep and cows, humans want to be a member of a group rather than alone.

In every type of competition, the competitors who join organizations have an advantage over the independent people. Even worse, the organizations that cheat have an advantage over everybody.

All of the democracies in the world allow the candidates to form organizations, and no nation has a legal system that is effective at eliminating crime networks. As a result, all of the democracies are favoring the candidates of crime networks.

There is no successful business, sports group, orchestra, or military that has, or would want to, select leaders for their organization through a process that is similar to the election of government officials.

Every culture promotes the belief that government officials must be selected in a completely different manner than how businesses select their leaders, but this Constitution believes that there should be no difference.

This constitution believes that a government is just an organization of people, and that all organizations follow the same concepts. Therefore, selecting a government official is the same as selecting a manager for a business; a doctor for a hospital; a scientist for a research laboratory; a chef for a restaurant; and a violin player for an orchestra.

No matter what type of job we are trying to hire a person for, the process of applying for the job should be pleasant and simple, and the people should apply as independent citizens, not as members of an organization.

We have a strong emotional attraction to food, sex, babies, status, and material items, but we do not have any emotional desire to analyze our leaders, look critically at ourselves or our culture, or replace the incompetent leaders.

Our emotional characteristics were beneficial to prehistoric people because their primary concerns were finding food, raising children, and protecting themselves from predators and neighbors.

We no longer have to worry about food or protecting our family. We need to put our time and effort into dealing with the problems of a modern society, such as the incompetence and corruption of people in leadership positions, censorship by journalists, false flag operations, and migrants trying to get into our nation but who have no interest in joining our society.

The issue of immigration is an example of an issue that is beyond most people's intellectual abilities. In 1870, Thomas Nast created this political cartoon to ridicule the Americans who wanted to prevent the Chinese people from emigrating into the USA. Michele Walfred describes the cartoon as showing that the British and Germans who emigrated to America were hypocrites for allowing Europeans into America, but oppressing other groups of people. She concludes her description of the cartoon with the sentence: The once oppressed have now become the oppressors.

However, that analysis is as stupid as somebody claiming that the personnel office of Sony is oppressing the people that they don't want to hire. Or complaining that a sports group or orchestra is oppressing the people that they don't want in their team.

Every organization should have the right to decide who they want in their team. It is absurd to accuse an organization of oppressing the people that they don't want in their team. This concept should apply to nations, also.

A nation should not be obligated to accept whoever wants to emigrate into the nation. It is especially absurd to require nations to accept people who don't want to join the culture, and who only want the benefits of the nation. That is as idiotic as forcing Sony to hire people who want to become employees only for the salary, and have no desire to join the team, or even speak the same language as the other employees.

Most people are following their emotional cravings rather than thinking, and most people don't have the intelligence to produce useful thoughts about modern problems. This causes them to be more concerned with issues of no importance.

For example, when a mysterious person posted some AI images of Taylor Swift that were somewhat sexual, millions of people passed around links to the images and discussed the issue with their friends. This behavior is similar to the reaction of the public when Janet Jackson partially exposed her nipple on television. Specifically, millions of people around the world quickly informed their friends about it.

The rapid spreading of the Taylor Swift images is another example of how the public will pass around sexual images and discuss worthless issues, but refuse to pass around, or even look at, the evidence that the World Trade Center towers were demolished with explosives; that some of our government officials are mentally impaired; and that the Jews are lying about the Holocaust. The public cannot be expected to discuss or spread important information.

The Taylor Swift images bring up an even more important issue. Specifically, a lot of journalists condemned the images, and many people, including government officials, advocated legislation to stop such images. The White House press secretary referred to the images as "alarming", and said "Of course Congress should take legislative action." Liz Cheney posted a one sentence remark: Taylor Swift is a national treasure.

Congressman Joseph Morelle wrote the Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act "to stop the spread of deepfake pornography". He believes that "The spread of A.I.-generated and altered images can cause irrevocable emotional, financial, and reputational harm."

Senator Dick Durbin claims that "Victims have lost their jobs, and may suffer ongoing depression or anxiety."

Everybody is already capable of creating pornographic images of Taylor Swift, and every other person, by using pencils, paintbrushes, and a variety of different software programs. We can also carve pornographic statues out of rock, wood, and foam.

If a pornographic AI image can cause "irrevocable emotional, financial, and reputational harm", so can the pornographic images created with a paintbrush, ballpoint pen, or Adobe Photoshop.

None of the people who are upset by the Taylor Swift images are "alarmed" by the evidence that the Apollo moon landings were fake, or that Jeffrey Epstein was blackmailing government officials the other influential people. None of them are suggesting that Congress take legislative action against such crimes.

Are journalists promoting Taylor Swift in order to manipulate voters?

Why do journalists and government officials have so much concern about promoting and protecting Taylor Swift?

The secretive people at The People’s Voice claim that Taylor Swift agreed to murder a child and drink some of his blood in order to join the "Illuminati" that controls the entertainment business.

It is possible that she is getting lots of publicity right now as a reward for being a good puppet. When the Jews blackmail a person that is in a public position, such as a government official or a celebrity, they will reward the person with whatever they want, such as money, fame, or sex, in order to keep them happy. That also allows them to keep pressure on the person by making such remarks as, "You took the money from us rather than go to the police, so don't complain that we forced you into something."

For example, a few years ago Will Smith's daughter, Willow, received tremendous publicity for the song Whip Your Hair, and that may have been a reward to Will Smith and/or his daughter, for keeping quiet about something illegal.

A similar situation seems to have occurred when Roman Polanski was accused of raping a 13-year-old girl. The girl and/or her parents seem to have been rewarded in return for keeping quiet.

If Taylor Swift is involved with a crime network that requires her and other people to commit murderers or pedophilia, then that crime network is a much more serious problem than the people who are using software to create sexually titillating images.

However, the public is not passing a link around to the The People’s Voice article, and the journalists and the White House press secretary are not complaining that The People's Voice are causing irrevocable emotional, financial, and reputational harm to Taylor Swift by making such an accusation. Nobody even considers it to be "alarming" that the accusations could be true. Nobody is demanding an investigation of that accusation, or why The People's Voice believes the accusation to be true.

At the beginning of 2024, a lawsuit was filed that accused Sean Combs of hiding video cameras in his home  and arranging for "Freak Off" parties so that he could blackmail people about their drug use and pedophile activities.

Taylor Swift and the government officials, journalists, and other influential people who are whining about the AI software are not, as of September 2024, showing any concern about a much more serious problem, which is the possibility that Sean Combs and the people he works with, such as Clive Davis and Kristina Khorram, are members of an Israeli crime network that is blackmailing and manipulating the entertainment and media businesses, government officials, police officers, college professors, lawyers, and other influential people.

Is the swirl a pedo symbol?

A lot of the television programs and movies display pedophile symbols, and some of the logos of businesses, such as Interscope Records, resemble some of those symbols. We should be more concerned about investigating the people and businesses that display those symbols than with the people who create images of naked women.

The people who dominate our society are not providing us with leadership, and neither is the public. The majority of people are incompetent at dealing with the problems of a modern society.

There is no sensible justification for being frightened of AI software, or the images that people create with it. Instead, we need to improve our attitudes (ie, our culture) towards software. Four improvements are:

1)		Adults must be responsible for their behavior. Every culture has evolved to allow us to blame our bad behavior on something other than our mind, such as poverty, bad parenting, white supremacy, sexism, and a lack of opportunities. The people who use software, knives, rocks, or other things to hurt or deceive somebody should be held responsible for their abusive behavior. We should not hold the software or rocks responsible. Donald Trump was insulted in September 2024 for promoting an image that was edited to show Kamala Harris with Sean Combs. However, as discussed here, the person who created the image should be held responsible for the deception, not Donald Trump and the other people who believed that it was a real photograph. Furthermore, we should investigate why the person created the image. He may have done so because he is working with the journalists, pedophiles, Jews, and other people who are trying to protect the pedophile network and hurt Donald Trump. That group of criminals might have created the image and then secretly convinced Trump that it was real so that they could insult Trump for promoting false images. It is also possible that they created a false image of Harris and Combs because there might be some real photos of her at his parties, and they are hoping to fool people into thinking that all of the photos are fake. If a group of people were responsible for that type of deception in Kastron, the Courts Ministry would be required to evict or euthanize them. People who want to change the world must do so in an honest manner by presenting their proposals to us. We must stop tolerating people who use deception, false flag operations, blackmail, murder, and other tricks to manipulate us.
2)		Software is just a tool. Computer software, regardless of whether it is described as artificial intelligence software, word processing software, or spreadsheet software, is just a tool, similar to scissors, lawnmowers, and bicycles. Tools are useful only to people who have been educated on how to use them, and who are willing to use them properly. It is detrimental to let people use tools that they do not know how to use properly, and/or are unwilling to use properly. Every culture is aware of this concept, but they apply it only to certain people and tools. For example, we prevent children from having access to such tools as razor blades and medicines, and every society requires us to get a license to use an airplane. However, no culture cares whether people know how to properly use, or are willing to properly use, many other tools, such as drones and guns. There is also no concern that people can use cultural tools properly, such as businesses, money, recreational activities, marriage, and holiday celebrations. This lack of concern about whether people are using tools properly allows a lot of people to hurt themselves and other people. This constitution improves the situation by making everybody responsible for what they do with a tool. Nobody can blame the tool for what somebody does with it. To reduce the abuse of tools, the License Ministry is responsible for determining which tools everybody has free access to, and which tools require a license. We cannot protect ourselves from people who misuse software, knives, medicines, alcohol, airplanes, or robots by trying to control those items. For example, requiring us to have a prescription for medical drugs cannot stop a person from misusing or abusing medical drugs. Rather, the prescriptions add a burden and complexity to society and our lives. Requiring medical drugs to have prescriptions is as idiotic and burdensome as requiring us to get a prescription to use scissors, knives, razor blades, and every other potentially dangerous tool. Furthermore, limiting a medical prescription to only six months or a year is as idiotic as allowing a person to have access to scissors for only six months to a year, and then requiring that he get another prescription if he wants to continue using the scissors. It is necessary to limit licenses for automobiles and airplanes to a certain number of years or decades because our mind and body degrades as we grow older, and we can forget the rules. However, nobody forgets how to swallow pills, so we don't need to limit prescriptions to one year. Instead of trying to control medical drugs, scissors, and other potentially dangerous tools, it would be more efficient and pleasant to raise standards for the people. The adults who cannot use tools properly should be evicted from society, or put on restrictions as if they were a child. It is especially ridiculous to be afraid of "artificial intelligence" software because all software is improving every year, and so it is conceivable that there will be a point in the future when all of the software could be described as having artificial intelligence, and nobody is using "stupid software". Instead of trying to control the "intelligent software", it would be more pleasant to raise standards for people, and those who cannot use software, knives, rocks, and other tools appropriately should be put on restrictions or evicted. We must blame a person for his bad behavior, not the tools that he abuses.
3)		We must stop tolerating loopholes. There are already laws that prohibit slander, and the existing laws should apply to people who try to hurt somebody with images that they created with AI software, paintbrushes, pencils, and photo editing software. The law should also apply to people who create tangible things that are intended to hurt somebody, such as statues, tapestries, embroideries, manikins, stained-glass windows, and tile mosaics. However, the existing court systems are so corrupt and crude that they allow "cat-and-mouse games", such as allowing a person to claim that he did not slander a person because he created an image or a statue of the person, rather than use words. This statue is "hate speech" An example is the statue in the photo to the right that is an attempt to hurt Donald Trump. The liberals, who boast about being kind, loving, and generous, seem to be the most likely to create images, statues, and other objects that are intended to hurt people. No culture has laws against those type of images or statues, but the Courts Ministry must regard them as slander, or as hate speech, even though there are no words in them, because the people who create those images are trying to hurt a person with them. The Courts Ministry should not be so foolish as to care whether a person is trying to hurt somebody with words, or with statues, embroidery, pencil sketches, guns, rocks, or knives. This concept also applies to news reports that are intended to hurt somebody, such as the hundreds of news reports that were published during 2024 that were intended to hurt Donald Trump. The Courts Ministry must be so intolerant of cat and mouse games that they can refer to those news articles as hate speech or slander.
4)		Our mind is our worst enemy. A person who hurts himself or other people with AI software, medical drugs, knives, or other tools is doing so because his mind made the decision to do so. None of us need to be protected from AI software or other tools. Rather, all of us need to be protected from the idiotic decisions that our mind makes, and those made by other people. To rephrase that, we need to be protected from humans, including ourselves, not from inanimate objects or computer software. The schools are required to teach these concepts to children, and give them practice in looking critically at their thoughts, and passing judgment on whether they are making intelligent decisions. By the time we get out of school, we should be accustomed to monitoring our decisions and looking critically at ourselves. Our emotions give us desires, biases, and fears, and that can result in idiotic and destructive decisions. We must be aware of our emotions and pass judgment on whether they are encouraging beneficial behavior. We must also realize that we have limited and imperfect intellectual abilities. Each of us believes that we are a super genius, but none of us are as intelligent as we think we are. All of us make mistakes and idiotic assumptions. And all of us have imperfect memories. An example of how our intellectual abilities can cause us to hurt ourselves are the people who cannot understand such concepts as genetics and evolution, and who instead believe in religions, Freudian psychology, voodoo, astrology, clairvoyance, and reincarnation. There are also people who lack the intelligence to understand that the World Trade Center buildings were demolished with explosives; that it was impossible for the Nazis to gas and burn 6 million Jews at the end of the war when there were extreme shortages of fuel and other resources; and that NASA is lying when they claim that a person on the moon cannot see stars because the sun is too bright. Many people also cannot understand the concept that the truth does not need protection, and that the people who are advocating the arrest or censorship of Holocaust deniers, anti-Semites, sexists, or racists are trying to eliminate their competitors and critics. Everybody's worst enemy is their own mind. None of us will be protected by becoming afraid of AI software, or by creating laws to control it. Instead, all of us would benefit by being pressured to look critically at ourselves, control our arrogance, become aware of our emotional biases and fears, and listen to constructive criticism. We would also benefit from laws that: • Prohibit Wikipedia, Google, Facebook, and other organizations from censoring people and information. • Prohibiting people from making unsupported accusations, such as Holocaust denier, racist, sexist, climate change denier, and anti-Semite. • Require historical information be corrected when somebody discovers that it is inaccurate or a lie. We all suffer from a lot of problems during our life, and almost all of them can be traced to our own mind's decisions. We regularly make idiotic decisions; mimic the idiotic behavior of the people in our peer group; foolishly trust people who are trying to abuse and exploit us; and trust the authorities without any concern for whether they are providing us with leadership.

Instead of allowing people to frighten us about AI software, we need to push ourselves into experimenting with methods of providing ourselves with better leadership, and better culture.

We cannot expect the majority of people to make sensible decisions about who to admire, or who they should be suspicious of. Most people tend to admire and trust the people who make them feel good, but the people who are the best at making us feel good are the people who are selfish, diabolical, and deceptive.

We must stop promoting the theory that the majority of people are qualified to vote.

This constitution regards government officials as city employees, and the presidents must be hired in the same manner that all other employees are hired. Specifically, the men who want to be president must apply for the job in the same manner that everybody applies for every other job.

All jobs, including government jobs, are listed in the Jobs database (examples of job listings are here). A person applies for a job by adding his name and ID number to the entry for the job. His ID number allows a person to access his entry in the People database, which has his life history, so none of the job applicants have to bother providing information about their previous jobs, education, or age.

The voters are analogous to the personnel department of a business. The voters analyze the candidates in the same manner that the people in the personnel department of a business analyze job candidates.

The voters use the People database to pass judgment on which of the candidates are the most appropriate for the job. The voters are not required to interview any of the candidates, but they can do so if they want to discuss something with them.

The candidates are prohibited from arranging for public speeches, and from advertising themselves. They must be as passive as candidates who apply for a job at a factory, restaurant, or hospital.

However, the voters are not required to be passive. They can take an active role in finding a president, just as the personnel office of a business often takes an active role in finding managers, engineers, scientists, and other people who are difficult to find. Specifically, the voters can contact a man that they believe is qualified to be president, and ask him to become a candidate for president.

The citizens are not permitted to vote, but citizens are allowed to post he document in the Suggestions category to explain who they believe should be hired as president, or which president they believe should be replaced.

However, in order to prevent problems that are similar to "ballot stuffing", in which the friends or family of a candidate posts hundreds of suggestions that he be elected, people cannot suggest one of their friends or family members to become president. Also, everybody who posts a document must identify themselves as the author, and they cannot repeat the same posts.

Everybody is held accountable for the suggestions that they post, so if a citizen posts a suggestion for a candidate but does not have intelligent reasoning for his suggestion, he will hurt his reputation. For example, a person would hurt his reputation if he posted a suggestion such as:

That is not an intelligent analysis of a candidate. That is an attempt to stimulate emotions and manipulate people.
More information is here about how suggestions are judged.

This constitution regards social science as a field of zoology. The leaders of our government, and the voters, are scientists in the branch of zoology that specializes in humans.

A person who wants to become a voter must have an education that is similar to what zoologists have. He must show evidence that he understands that humans are a species of animal, and that humans follow the same concepts of evolution and genetics as other animals.

The voters are responsible for analyzing what each president does, and passing judgment on whether they are bringing improvements to the city and culture, doing nothing of value, or making something worse.

The voters analyze the effect that the presidents are having on people's lives and attitudes, the businesses, the recreational activities, the forests, the rivers, and the future generations. They analyze the city and the people in the same manner that a zoologist analyzes a group of wolves or prairie dogs.

The democracies and free enterprise systems allow journalists, professors, the ADL, and other organizations to provide deceptive analyses, and are not held accountable for their effect on society, the voters are regarded as some the top leaders of society, and they are held responsible for the effect they have on our lives.

The Voters Minister in the Quality Division is required to routinely pass judgment on which of the voters are providing the most intelligent, honest, and beneficial analyses, and he must routinely replace the worst performing voter at least once every five years so that somebody else has a chance to test his abilities.

A democracy does not hold voters accountable for what they do. This allows the voters to blame their incompetent government on other people, such as the other voters, corporations, lobbyists, and such mysterious concepts as "special interests". When Donald Trump was elected president, many voters blamed Russia for getting him elected.

This constitution requires the voters to be responsible for the candidates that they elect. The voters who tend to elect candidates who turn out to be the worst presidents must be considered as incompetent voters, and they must be replaced.

This constitution requires voters to treat the presidents just like other city employees. Specifically, the voters must give job performance reviews to the presidents at least once a year. Those reviews are posted in the People database, just like all other job performance reviews. The voters will use their performance reviews to determine which of the presidents is doing the worst job and should be replaced.

Most employees will not have many job performance reviews, and most of the reviews will be very brief and simplistic. However, the voters are required to give the presidents a more thorough job analysis because the presidents are involved with more complex decisions, and they have a greater influence over our future.

Those President Performance Reviews will help the public understand the presidents and their policies, and they also allow everybody to pass judgment on which of the voters are providing the most useful analyses.

The Voters Minister will use those job performance reviews, and the voting history of the voters, to determine which voter should be replaced. The citizens are also permitted to post a document about which voter they believe should be replaced.

None of the democracies require voters to routinely replace their worst performing government official, or even to pass judgment on which of the government officials is the worst.

This constitution arbitrarily picks five years between the scheduled elections, and the voters are required to replace at least one president during every election. This requirement will force the voters to pass judgment on which of the three presidents was the least beneficial, and it will give somebody else a chance to become a president.

A president has to retire at age 70, so if a president becomes 69 before his five-year period is over, then he must be replaced at some time while he is 69, and that will meet the requirement of replacing one of the three presidents every five years, so the voters will not have to replace a president in the next scheduled election, if they feel that the others are doing an adequate job.

If the majority of voters comes to the conclusion that a president is so incompetent that he should be replaced before his five-year term is over, then they can replace him at any time. They should not wait for the election, as voters are doing in democracies today. The voters should not be passive. They should be as active in replacing incompetent presidents as a business is with replacing incompetent employees.

Voters must regard the presidents as being gears in a transmission, and they must replace the broken gears as soon as they notice them.

When they replace an incompetent president before the election, that meets the requirement of replacing one of the three presidents during every election.

The majority of people are so passive, and have so little initiative, that they never replace government officials between elections. Instead, they wait for scheduled elections.

By comparison, the voters ministry is required to restrict voting to people who have much more of an initiative to get involved with the city's leadership. This will result in elections that don't follow schedules.

For example, if the year is 2050, the voters must replace one of the presidents by 2055. However, if they replace a president in 2052, then the next scheduled election will be five years from then, which will be 2057.

The schools are required to put students through a variety of exercises in order to help the students and the school officials determine each student's mental and physical abilities and desires. One of the exercises that the schools must give the teenage students is analyzing the mental characteristics and job performance of a government official.

That type of exercise would give the students practice in analyzing people, and it would help the teachers identify the students who are likely to be useful as voters and other jobs that require analyses of people.

The students would also compare their analysis of the official to the analysis of other students. That would help the students realize that there is no correct analysis, and that most people produce "ordinary" analyses, and only a few students produce analyses that are truly impressive.

Each of us believes that we are such a super genius that we can provide an intelligent analysis of ourselves and other people, including an explanation of other people's facial expressions and body postures. However, understanding ourselves and other people is more difficult than understanding wolves, monkeys, and other living creatures because:

1)		Human behavior is more complex than other animals because we are more intelligent and educated.
2)		Humans have been degrading genetically for thousands of years, and becoming more diverse, which results in an increasingly large percentage of the population that behaves in an abnormal and different manner.
3)		Nobody yet knows what differences there are between the different races, between men and women, between children and adults, and between the people who have both male and female characteristics.

We are so arrogant that we believe that we can understand what other people think and feel, but none of us can understand another person. For example:

•		No man can understand what a woman feels or how she thinks, and no woman can understand a man.
•		Those of us who have no interest in alcohol, heroin, or marijuana cannot understand why some people want to use those drugs.
•		The people with bipolar problems cannot understand what life is like for people who do not have that problem, and those of us without that problem cannot understand what it feels like to have that problem.

Nobody is even capable of understanding their own behavior, and none of us can be certain if our mind should be described as "normal". Each of us assumes that we have a perfect mind, but each of us is just a haphazard jumble of genes. Everybody has imperfections. Even though some people have "trivial" imperfections, those imperfections have an effect on their behavior.

In order for a person to truly understand himself, he would have to know the details of his particular mental characteristics and imperfections, but none of us knows much about our mind. None of us even knows how our mind is affected by our body's ability to provide glucose, hormones, and whatever other chemicals our brain needs.

Although only a few people will be voters, all of the teenagers will benefit by being given exercises in analyzing people because everybody has to occasionally make analyses of themselves and other people. For example, parents have to occasionally analyze the behavior of their children; married couples have to analyze one another; and managers must analyze their employees.

In order to be an effective voter or other leader, a person needs an above-average ability to analyze people. Although there is no right or wrong analysis of a person, we can pass judgment on who is producing the most useful analyses, and with the least amount of bias.

The Teentown officials are also required to give teenagers practice as leaders because those exercises are valuable regardless of whether a teenager has an interest in becoming a leader. The reason is because everybody occasionally needs to take the role of a leader, especially when they are around children.

Furthermore, most people, especially men, regularly take the role of a leader simply because we have such a strong craving to be at the top of the hierarchy. For example, adult men cannot refrain from giving lectures to other people about crime, raising children, abortion, Donald Trump, and euthanasia.

Everybody would benefit by having practice as a leader so that they can get a better understanding of how difficult the job actually is, and to get them accustomed to having their leadership performance judged by other people.

Each student would be given a job performance review by the teacher and other students, and they would be compared to the other students. Those exercises and comparisons would help the teenagers realize that being a leader is not as exciting or as easy as their emotions assume. It would also help them realize that most people are only average in their leadership abilities, and half of the students are below-average in leadership abilities.

Although some of the people who have passed school courses have turned out to be incompetent or dishonest, the concept of training a person for a job, and requiring that they pass tests to prove that they can do the job, has proven valuable for all types of jobs. Furthermore, by continuously adjusting the school curriculum and testing procedures, the courses become increasingly useful for training students and determining each student's abilities.

Every society has developed school courses and testing procedures for pilots and doctors, but no society has yet made an attempt to create courses and testing programs for people who want to become voters, government officials, executives, journalists, parents, or a spouse. Every culture realizes that it is difficult to become a pilot, but they assume it is easy to become a voter, government official, and parent.

Furthermore, no culture requires people to meet any standards, or pass any educational course, in order to create or modify recreational activities, holiday celebrations, social clubs, song lyrics, fiction material, news reports, or historical information. Even young children have the freedom to create and modify culture.

To make the situation more absurd, when somebody creates a detrimental cultural activity, such as the Internet "challenges", no society provides anybody with the authority to stop the activity, or deal with the people who created it. Instead, every culture promotes the buyer beware attitude, such as this BBC article that warns parents to discourage the skull breaker challenge. That is similar to warning people about fraudulent medicines rather than prohibiting businesses from producing them, or warning children to watch out for pedophiles rather than eliminating the pedophiles.

In California, a person can be driver's license is revoked if he has certain problems with dementia, diabetes, strokes, or seizures. However, those people are allowed to vote because voting is considered to be less mentally challenging than driving an automobile.

By comparison, this constitution regards voters, government officials, business executives, journalists, and many other jobs as "leadership" positions. The people who create or modify cultural activities are also be regarded as "leaders". All of those people have a significant effect on our lives and future.

This constitution requires all of the people who want to determine our future to pass educational courses and show evidence that they have the ability to provide us with intelligent analyses and guidance. We are under no obligation to allow a person to determine our future simply because he wants to.

This constitution also regards marriage and raising children to be complex issues that children should be educated about. The US government prohibits people from adopting children if they show signs of incompetence, dishonesty, or mental disorders, but those people are allowed to have as many biological children as they please, even if they don't want to take care of them.

It is not easy to design a course to train a student to be a machinist, dentist, or scientist. The courses that we have today have been evolving for centuries, and they still need improvements. Creating courses to teach people how to become a voter, spouse, or leader will also be difficult, but it is better to start the process than to do nothing.

An important aspect of this constitution is that it gives people the right to post suggestions and complaints in the Suggestions category, but that freedom will be useful only if people are capable of providing sensible suggestions and complaints, and only if the government officials and other people are capable of providing sensible analyses of those suggestions and complaints. (For the sake of simplicity, "suggestions and complaints" will often be referred only to as "suggestions", and sometimes only as "complaints".)

Every culture assumes that creating suggestions is simple, but creating a useful suggestion is just as difficult as creating a useful refrigerator or computer. The employees who provide technical support in the world today are routinely encountering people who cannot make sensible complaints.

We need practice expressing our suggestions so that the people who read them don't feel as if they are playing the game of Twenty Questions.

Even if a student has no desire to post suggestions, or get a job in which he must analyze suggestions, everybody will benefit from having practice with creating and analyzing suggestions because everybody has to do it occasionally.

For example, parents and children frequently have to analyze suggestions from one another; married couples have to analyze suggestions from their spouse; and employees have to analyze suggestions from their boss or other employees.

By giving the teenagers some practice in creating and analyzing suggestions, they will become better at it, and it will help the teachers discover which students show the most talent in providing intelligent analyses of suggestions.

Rather than give students fictional suggestions to analyze, the schools should give them suggestions that people have recently posted in the Suggestions category.

Also, they should analyze the newest suggestions, rather than suggestions from previous years because the older suggestions will have been analyzed already, and the students might have heard about the analysis, which would influence their own analysis.
Some examples of suggestions are here.

The Suggestions category might end up with more suggestions than anybody has the time to carefully read. Therefore, we need to prioritize the suggestions. The people who have posted useful suggestions in the past would have the highest status, and their messages will appear first in the list.

This requires determining who has been the most successful in the past, and that requires analyzing a person's history and passing judgment on his talent.

Although a lot of people complain when they are judged, we must resist being intimidated by them. It is necessary for people in a modern society to pass judgment on one another's talents, abilities, and characteristics. Therefore, students are required to get some practice analyzing other people. This will also help teachers determine who is the best at providing intelligent analyses of a person's history.

One of the exercises that the students should be required to do is analyze a person who has posted a few suggestions, and pass judgment on whether his suggestions are above-average in value, in which case his suggestions should have high priority, or whether he tends to create below-average suggestions.