Manifesto-Vol-2

MANIFESTO: AFRICAN CORPORATIST SOCIETY

By: Omolaja Makinee

A FIVE-VOLUME LITERARY BOOK

VOLUME 2: ETHNOPUBLIC STATE: CITIZENRY SHARED CONTROL OF STATE GOVERNMENT ADMINISTRATION BY GOVOX-POPULI

AFRICAN CORPORATISM

Copyright © 2021 by Omolaja Makinee

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without written permission from the author.

ISBN: 978-1-63877-593-5 Paperback

Printed in Africa by Makinee

01-April-2021

Cover Image: The African Renaissance Monument: a 52m tall bronze statue located on top of one of the twin hills known as Collines des Mamelles, outside Dakar, Senegal.

Table of Contents

PREFACE

INTRODUCTION

1. THE ETHNOPUBLIC STATES OF AFRICA

2. THE ETHNOPUBLICAN STRUCTURE OF AFRICAN STATES

The Designing Instrument of Govox-Populi Governing Administration

Govity Form of Government by Commicracy

3. ETHNOPUBLICAN-STATE AND COMMICRACY

The Customary Aspect of Commicracy in Ethnopublican State

The Social and Economic Characteristics of Commicracy

4. GOVOX-POPULI AS A SCIENCE

Commicratic Procedures of Govoxiers

The State Power Position of the Govoxiers

5. TOWARDS GOVERNMENTAL POPULOCRACY

Promoting the govoxical culture of populocracy

Shared-Governance: The Inevitable Path for Citizenry-Empowerment

6. THE SOCIALIST FOUNDATION OF ETHNOPUBLICANISM

Stages in the development of citizenry-centred commicratic Agencies

Commicracy flowing from interests of collective-Individualism

References and Select Bibliography

Preface

Ethnopublic differs from both Republic and Monarch because it sees the power of the state in society as being monopsonised by the citizenry-electorates (or the populous). Govoxical theory of populocracy sees the populous citizens of society as those with the legislative-power of state government. It sees society as one dominant group, not divided by class or by any exercise of state power between the government and the governed.

Ethnopublican state is the nationalism-structure of govox-populi administration of government, and the body of both their socio-analyses allows us to situate the theory of populism within the system called populocracy, as its fundamental ideology developed from a single entity: the rule by the people – and that took us down the path of the ascendancy of ‘government of the people’ (surpassing democracy) and is the driving force of our global socio-culture of the world population; that is directing us towards the emergence of the age-of-revelation; that is growing from the platform of the global culture of web-internetisation.

There are, however, many ways in which the theory of ethnopublicanism differs from all hitherto nationalism-structure of the state in human society. Its theory does not pander towards subjective analysis and does not question whether the state-centred decision of the people that are governed is beneficial for society; it maintain its conclusion about the inevitability of the ‘rule by the people’, and it sustain both the government and the governed as the constitutional coalition of a single party of govity.

The central theme of ethnopublicanism is that a society populous governance rule of their society is inevitable and I, therefore, advocates for the abolition of republicanism including its monopoly of state power by a small minority of politicians in African society. I raised the argument against the state administrative system of bureaucracy and their elite-theory of power that sees the elite governing rule of society as the normative structure of Nation-state in our current generation. Given the high levels of inequality and class-collaboration in political societies, the bureaucratic social structure built to administer society, implement policies and regulate social conducts is not surprising in the activity of the routine conventional-corruption at the expense of the governed. I say, just as republicanism derailed monarchy nationalism-structure the world over, so as ethnopublicanism is on course to be the cause to derail republicanism and its administrative system of bureaucracy from the state administration of government in African society.

In this volume-two, I introduced the concept of commicracy as the new mode of organisation in African society, both in the social life of African people collectively and in the economic life of African working-group. The entirety of my analyses, as volume-three of this manifesto proposed to show, will cover some comparison between bureaucracy and commicracy, and it aims at understanding the fundamental characteristics of commicracy both in the social context and economic theory. I have focused on the negative consequences of bureaucracy post-independence of African states, and claim that the administrative regime of bureaucracy remains organised within the capitalist 19th-century paradigm with its excessive use of discretion in decision-making processes within organisations – and that has been a contributing factor that has been contributing to the economic under-development in African societies today.

The theory of commicracy is an administrative approach partly derived from the global corporatist 21^st century open-access and free-culture that I proposed to become the driving force of decision-making processes within organisations in Africa – and the leading web-based corporate-groups such as Amazon, Facebook, TikTok, eBay, WordPress, Alibaba, and more like, are appropriating organisational innovations based on altruist methods. Everywhere we looked, we see business corporations and even a handful of state governments transforming their administrative regime into high-performance organisational structures in such as ways that integrate everyone involved with the organisation to discovering their true talents and everyone is winning and benefiting in some ways, whilst the organisation management remains to embolden to adapt with changes that continually results from their members’ collective-individualistic associational-ethics.

I say, African society should break free from the restrictions of bureaucracy. Recognising the new challenges we face, African society should embrace commicracy that harness both human ingenuity and computer intelligence-technology where needed. Commicracy is an organisational structural mode that delivers, productive and capable of being codified to the degree that suits the individual organisational purpose, and even industrial trade environments and businesses across Africa can increase their productivity through the proposed commicratic culture of adaptiveness, experimentation, learning and innovation. I claim that the installation of the proposed ethnopublicanism in Africa is the change we need to abolish bureaucracy and to sideline its regime to history in our 21st-century generation in Africa. To quote Professor Warren Bennis, in his article: “Coming end of Bureaucracy” (1966) “The conditions of our modern industrial world will bring about the death of bureaucracy”.

Here, I moved beyond the African people’s perception of insufficient economic resource and our marginalisation from the global market economy caused by the poor African monetary system that continually cannot measure up within the global economy. I had a peek at the political corruption claims and its oppressive bureaucratic organisational work-ethics across African states’ governments. I looked into the history and the progress of the African-Union and its recent AfCFTA achievements to integrate African economic areas. I focused in particular on the history of Pan-Africanism and what its philosophies expressed in the cultural identity of people of African descents within the HomeLand and in the Diasporas, what its different ideologies attempt to convey governmentally, socially, and economically.

I applied the theory of populocracy to display a robust theory of ethnopublicanism and the governance rule of government by the citizenry-electorates, as an alternative to the democratic system of governance rule by republican or monarchy state; covering a more profound populocratic form of government in conformity with the govox-populi administration of government (as an alternative to the democratic form of the political administration of government), in which citizenry-electorates are the state legislative-power holder and decision-makers on all affairs of the State. In Volume-1 of this Manifesto, I revisited the theory of ethnoism to corporatist economic structure in Africa; I advanced the theory of ethno-corporatism as the key to securing maximum control of state-power and economic resources to the decision making in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates; in which the organisational system of commicracy has administered the platform of ethnopublican state’s apparatus in this volume-2 as a direct alternative to bureaucracy – bureaucracy that has been developing the underdevelopment within African-Union organisation.

My introductory point is that, as I hope to show in this manifesto, ethnopublicanism feature a high level of equality in society and sufficiently strong govoxical institutions in state government. These enable the citizenry-electorates (or their working-group) to have total control of state-centred decision-making power in the day-to-day administration of government that affects them individually and as a collective. In fact, conventional-corruption that those politicians routinely used to garner electoral support, with coercion applied to rhetoricised populist policies that they have no intention of keeping when they seized government power, where they ended up making policies in line with the interests that favour their elite group at the expense of their electorates, does not exist on the theory of ethnopublicanism. This claim that no matter what rhetoric or charismatic-expression a govoxier may apply to persuade the people to make a certain decision in an ethnopublican state, the final decision on an elective-process not only lies with the electorates but the people also have the power to change the decision that they made if they find its implementation to not meet their intended interest. This not only makes it valuable for govoxiers to maintain the integrity of their office in state government by choosing policies in line with the interests of the people, but it also places the power of the state in the control and direction of the populous citizenry-electorates to direct the course of their society as they so desire, and to be solely responsible for the course of their society’s social and economic successes and of its ills.

One area of research that contributed to my conceptual theories in social behaviour in part of my research of this manifesto is driven by my impending vocational research project in behavioural science, which I titled: Psychextrics. Psychextrics is a behavioural-science with its own subject-matter and deals with specific principles underlying all human behavioural phenomena within wide ranges of spectrums. Here, I dealt with certain confusion between the words we ascribed to the meaning of a web of interconnected parts fused together to operate as a single entity, I came to reconstitute what serves as ‘complex’ to enhance its legitimate meanings we ascribe to things. The meaningful representation of the word “complexity” has been used to be too one-sided by the moderns. No amount of books or articles written to recover the lost glory of the word would undo the damage that already had befallen unto its meaningful representation. When we use the word ‘complex’ nowadays, the negative connotations of the word are often the first to come to mind. One may think of complexity as the state or quality of being complicated, and another may ascribe it to a factor involved in an intertwined process or situation. Whereas, they do not know that the word complex and fusion are synonyms and that both words are simply relative to the context of the state of things being combined into one body or an entire structure comprising a network of interconnected parts.

In my attempt to avoid confusion to the senses, and I hope others follow in my approach to say, for example, that we are not in a complex world where everything is in disarray and in a complicated process, but that we are in a world of fusionism where inter-network of things fused together in harmony and in connected parts. To say that our digital age is fusion and not complex is to maintain the term ‘complex’ to the negative connotations of the word and ascribed the positive connotations of the word to ‘fusionism’. I say that the fusion of humans with artificial intelligence technology; both of which have a distinct existence but have gained the reaction by common-design as a combined form to govern the existence of things. The identity of a human and the behaviour the individual manifested can either be the release or the absorption of AI-technology, such as the reaction to social-media contents through computer or mobile phone, TV or Radio, and the likes. Humans in relative fusion with AI-technologies are the energy source of our current experience of the world.

The hints of a revolution this manifesto preach to emigrate African states government into a unitary form of ‘One’ nationality and one Nation, is the creation of a fusionistic country like the United States of America; to emigrate African society into an ethnopublican nationalism-structure, is to generate a fusion of diversity of culture to practice a single custom of socio-economic unity; and to establish the internetisation economic platform of ethnocorporatism in Africa, is to reproduce the fusion world of web-internetisation of global corporatism in Africa by Africans and for Africans.

Introduction

Ethno. I mean the term “ethnoism” I recognised as the emphasis on approach to various human cultures relative to the collective-individualism affirmation of a group of people. The term Ethnopublicanism, I proposed to ascribe to define a group of people or nation united – not by race, religion or ethnicity – but by their proclaimed common-unity of socio-economic interests.

The ethnopublicanism-centred approach is a qualified right to a group of people based on their shared-culture of common socio-economic interests, power and resources. The nature of ethnopublicanism therefore places great emphasis on the theory of nationalism. It distinguishes nation-states primarily according to their form of government and economic system, and distinguished individuals primarily according to their socio-economic culture of nationalism and NOT religion, race or ethnicity. The theory of ethnopublicanism attaches little importance to race, religion, ethnic-origin or ethnicity and language as a nationality difference between nation-states, although it recognises that it is important when groups of people believe they belong to a particular race or ethnic group or speak the same language of a particular group.

Indeed, the global migration of people from place to place in human-society creates the ideas of identifying people by their race or ethnic origin. The approaches of ethnopublicanism based around the idea of nationalism assert that migrants – by the normal operation or regular procedure in which a nation-state conducts its social system of social-control – routinely assimilate by adopting the culture of nationalism of their host country. Therefore, the theory of ethnopublicanism focuses specifically on people’s culture of socio-economic nationalism to support the use of the concept of citizenship and rejects the idea of distinct culture-of-nationalism of people based on race or religion co-habiting in a particular national boundary.

I argue that the increase in inter-migration of people in human society has made it increasingly difficult to differentiate the culture of nationalism of people based on race or ethnic origin; I point out that global internetisation socio-economic platform of corporatism has created greater culture variation within people of the same race or from the same ethnic-origin adopting multi-differential culture of nationalism the world over; and I say that the socio-economic culture of a country induces greater power of effect upon the nationalism-culture of all people cohabiting in its society, irrespective of race or ethnic origin.

I claim that the value of the theory of ‘ethnopublic’ has far more scope and depth in defining the concept of ethnicity, race or religion to describe nationalism-culture. Ethnopublicanism manifests the revealed preference in individuals’ social life based on the wide range of diverse collective-individualism of its citizenry. To emulate Edward Blyden (1832-1912) when he referred to the historical social life of African society and said that, in Africa ‘all work for each, and each work for all’ as the socio-culture of what he referred to as ‘what is mine goes; what is ours abides” – and it defined the practice of collectivism in its purest form that had existed in African society. And here, I advanced that theory of collectivism to propose the socio-culture of collective-individualism under ethnopublicanism to what I referred to as ‘The goodwill of what is yours; made the goodwill of what is mine to become ours’.

This raised the culture of collective-individualism to see race, ethnicity or religion as merely an influence on group actions and do not set it to determine their nationalism-culture that sees socio-economic customs as what abides everyone in the altruist-relations between people in an ethnopublican society. I maintain that the boundaries between the concepts of ethnicity, race or religion on the one hand, and nationalism-culture on the other, differ for the following reasons:

• People of the same religion or ethnic-origin often have a belief that they share a common culture, and they placed themselves in the notion that their actions will be obliged to be determined by the culture of their ethnic group or religious belief. Whereas, they often failed to commit to base their actions on the prescribed socio-culture in their host countries that do not afford them the social inclusion to their nationalism-culture.
• The ethnification of migrant groups to their ethnic-origin, race or religion merely influences their identification and communications that allow them to keep in close touch with the cultural expressions of their ethnic-culture or influenced their determination to maintain residency within the ethnoburb community of their race or to be minded to establish their association with their religious group. Whereas, any of these actions rarely have a relative existence with individuals’ performance of their prescribed nationalism-culture in their host country.
• Nationalism-culture is very often used to prescribe law-and-order regulations of its society, and conversely; and they commonly prescribed it to develop from that society indigenous ethnic-culture or from other related concepts such as indigenous religious-culture. In consequence, indigenous culture is often a legitimate means to prescribe society nationalism-culture, and thus ranked nationalism-culture hierarchically above other related indigenous culture in any society or migrated culture of migrants to their host country, and failure to assimilate to it often lead to social exclusion and causing one unequal treatment and hostility within mainstream society.

The theory of ethnopublicanism, therefore, applied the theory of ethnomethodology to illustrate the ideas of the method that human-society used to ‘construct, account for and give meaning’ to their society nationalism-culture. The term ethnomethodology literally means “people’s methods”. Unlike some ethnomethodologists believing that ‘there is no real social order. They say that social life appears orderly to members of society only because members actively engage in making sense of social life; they added that societies have regular and ordered patterns only because members perceive them in this way; and they concluded that social order is therefore a convenient fiction – an appearance of order constructed by members of society.

Nay, Saith I. Sociological-paradigm had been applied to such extent that it is fundamentally mistaken in ethnomethodologists’ investigative approach of ‘people’s methods’ members of society used to construct their social world, their shared sense of morality in ethics, and the sense of well-being of what represents life going well or badly for the collectives in any society.

In Africa, for example, nationalism-culture began as an instrument of the legislative-arm of state governments across African societies collectively. Fractions of the various indigenous ethnic groups operating within any given African society we found to consciously or subconsciously applying their individuals’ ethnic culture to influence the value consensus of their society nationalism-culture. The State legislatures are routinely drawn upon to that part of their indigenous ethnic-culture of their society to prescribe laws that support the interests of their ethnic culture, and its performance then becomes the nationalism-culture of all members of that society ethnic groups and migrants alike. Those who hold state legislative-power routinely exercise that power to draw upon their individual areas of indigenous ethnic-culture that appeals to their individual sense of morality in ethics to pass state-laws designed to coerce and control the subject-class. In consequence, laws are rarely a value of consensus to all members of African society because it is a reflection of the ideology of the indigenous ethnic-culture of those who prescribe the particular law at any one time.

Across Africa today, social media is the primary social influencers of new ideologies and is increasingly developing our society nationalism-culture; some of which are separate and rarely relative to any of our African society indigenous culture. And thus it becomes increasingly difficult for lawmakers to prescribe laws that do not conform to the social influences that our African people are already exposed to in their daily receipts of information on social media platforms.

In any human society the world over, not just in Africa, we found from the middle of the 20th century the Contemporary-era that began in the western-society and brought about the new era of Information-Age in which the development of technological advances influences the social, economic and nationalism-culture of the rest of the world through the open culture of globalisation. Human society the world over now found themselves in position within each other cultural appurtenances that influence actions mostly through Hollywood films and television dramas since the 20^th-century, and YouTube, TikTok, Facebook, Twitter and more, that dominates the global social media mainstream in the 21^st-century; even though most Africans who had never travelled outside of the continent have had no real-time connection with western people and their indigenous culture. It increasingly became the norm in our current era of global web-internetisation that any state-laws anywhere in the world today can prescribe laws that are not derivative from any of their nation’s indigenous culture.

The common theme in this second-volume of African Corporatism Manifesto, I tried to put into context how the occurring web-internetisation happenings that brought about the global web-internetisation era of corporatist society has eroded the concept of race and ethnicity from our nationalism-culture in our 21st-century generation, and replaces it with the global common-unity of socio-economic customs to dictate our nationalism-culture, and thus manifest the theory of collective-individualism of what I ascribed to be the socio-culture of the theory of ethnopublicanism in this manifesto. Everywhere we looked, we see the various indigenous cultures subtly adapting to, if not already abandoned, the old condition of existence of their indigenous tribes for the global socio-culture to dictate the culture of their individual community and social life.

I claim that we are now in the Age-of-Revelation, globally; and I defined our occurring revelation-age as the beginning of the re-evaluation of social and economic values that emphasises equalism-delivery relations to everyone in human society, where everything of monetary value in the deposed capitalist society is now freely available on a non-monetary terms in the current global corporatist society – making what would otherwise have been graded as intellectual properties in capitalist society open for anyone and from anywhere free to use, re-use, redistribute them, to re-modify or change any creative works of others as free content without compensation or requiring the consent of the original creators on the web-internetisation platform.

I say, when you think of the Open-Data of Information; the Open-Government of politics; the Open-Access of scientific research; the Open-Care in health and social welfare that is influencing our human culture collectively around the world; the Free-Culture of education available to anyone from anywhere at no cost on internet platforms with the recognition of other cultures across the globe, and more like; then you know we are in the Revelation-Age – where intellectual properties are increasingly becoming freely available to anyone from anywhere to use and amend and innovate for their useful-values as they so desire

Indeed, the global age-of-revelation is the influential factor for the proposed theory of ethnopublicanism and ethno-corporatism in this manifesto. This manifesto is encouraging African states collectively to be persuaded on the path of what I identified and called the Restoration-Era. The restoration-era would be known as the break from protégism that will incorporate excess economic resource in Africa, and the development of the socio-economic reformation of all African states.

In this new era I speak of, we would see the reinstitution of governments, economic advances, and technology that would give way to equalism flowing from the socio-economical interests of collective-individualism across African society. The proposed restoration-era in Africa will be known for its restoration of the Stone-Age era in human society – the revival of the common-unity of socio-economic customs. This era of socio-economical interests I speak of would radically affect the day-to-day life of people all along the socio-economic equalism of all to the exception of no other.

I argue that the unitary form of all African states into a ‘One’ Nation-state is an inevitable path for our human development and modernisation to align with global corporatism, social progress and economic empowerment of African states collectively. I also advocate for the socio-culture of collective-individualism to achieve progress in making the computer-technology industry with its web-internetisation platform as the driving force of our economy to self-sufficiency subsistence. I say that if our current African leaders truly are committed to achieving progress through inciting other countries outside Africa to share in our ideas of ethno-corporatist movement and for the collective African government to become an equal trading partner in this global corporatism, all African states must be persuaded to come together in this holy-alliance I speak of and to commit and declare to transition to ethnopublican nationalism-structure for the sake of the inevitable progress of African people this manifesto speaks.

CHAPTER ONE

THE ETHNOPUBLICAN STATES OF AFRICA

A reawakening is hovering over Africa – the dawn of ethnopublicanism. All the old eras have contributed to the rise of its materialism, keeping even-pace with the rapid dissolutions of the old conditions of existence. The influence of global corporatism in Africa, causing us a certain prickling sensation to address the questions of the process to institutionalising our economic contribution to the world, with African natural resources and intellectual ideas that travels across national boundaries with the accomplishment of foreign agents, the flow of Africans around the world as labour migrants or refugees, that devotion to human welfare to migrate out of Africa out of necessity or in search of a better life opportunities for the individual self and families, is here addressed and to be a turnaround for the greater good with the installation of ethnopublican states of Africa.

In the 1950s, divided African colonies gained their independence from western colonial rule, but it took three-decades before the last African country formerly Southern-Rhodesia to gain its independence from British rule in 1980 when it officially adopted the name Zimbabwe. Then, in 1963, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) was formed to promote unity and cooperation amongst the 32 newly independent African states and it grew eventually to all of African 54 member states when Zimbabwe joined the OAU on 18-June-1980, but it took four-decades before OAU forged ahead in the formation of African-Union (AU) member states in 2002 to commit to the progress of the social, political and economic integration of African states collectively.

Today, in the year 2021, six-decades after the first formation of African member states and we are yet to commit to the unitary form of all African states into a single national body – the idea that Africans originates from common descents and have common interests and should be unified under ‘One’ nationalism-structure – the call of the Pan-Africanism movement to restore African society to its modern revival of our ancient African-socialism.

Lest we forget, or rather shall we fail to look back on, the originating ideas for the creation of the Pan-Africanism movement that originates from the African Diasporas and its slogan of the HomeLand of “Africa for the Africans” popularised by Marcus Garvey (b.1887-d.1940), in his ‘Declaration of Negro Rights’ in the year 1920. We should remember, or otherwise, shall we fail to recall, that the two opposing Pan-Africanism ideological-platforms emerged in opposing views between the collectivistic corporatist-model advocated by the Casablanca-group and the individualistic capitalist-model advocated by the Brazzaville and Monrovia-Group. We should think back to, and we shall not fail to put a name to it, the decision of the OAU to uphold and declare the implementation of the individualistic capitalist-model advocated by the Brazzaville and Monrovia-group, but then committed to distant African economy from the economic industries of western-built capitalism that is reproducing excess economic resource in western societies – the consequence of which results in African economies became trapped in essential forms of the classic mixed and export-oriented economic relations of protégé-socialism with the Western states – who are both our buyers of export economic resources and our protégé aid-fund providers till this day.

We should think of, and indeed we shall not fail to be sure of it, that the originating idea of the Pan-Africanism movement congress organised by W.E.B Du Bois in 1919 held in Paris; 1921 held in London, Brussels and Paris; 1923 held in London and Lisbon; and 1927 held in New-York; framed the movement in the common-unity of race directed against the “colour-bar” discrimination between white people and black people, was merely a necessary ideological expression to mobilise Africans to transcends beyond the western mollycoddling of Africans in the old condition of the common-unity of race, where racial differences became known as inherent to culture as opposed to biological differences between humans – the ideology of their preceded chattel-era – where Du Bois famously was quoted: “the problem of the 20th century is the problem of the colour line”.

The 1945 Pan-Africanism congress held in Manchester, England, advanced the main originating idea to call for the decolonisation of all African colonies from western colonial rules – for the revival of the ancient African-socialism, including the explicit call for the unitary form of all African states governments and joint economy; which formed the manifesto for the more pragmatic formation of the Casablanca-group in 1961 – the developing consequence for this manifesto’s proposed creation of ethnopublican states of Africa; a unified governmental organisation of judicial-body, executive-body, and economy-body, and a supranational legislative-body; that would commit each member states government to transfer sovereign powers to the supranational ethnopublican body and the StateLords that develops from it would commit to deliberates jointly as the judicial-arm of African member states government collectively and votes on policies submitted to the judicial that will affect each other member state; where each state’s regional citizenry-electorates have the power to votes on domestic laws and policies that will affect their individual member state regions; where the creation of the unitary form of the proposed four-arms of government (Judicial, Executive, Economy, and Legislative) implements policies and regulates the affairs of each member states equally and collectively, with joint economy and resources, shared powers and governance of the rule-of-law.

Having seen it all, I say that it is regressive in acting as we are in seeking any kind of progress under the Pan-Africanism Declaration advocated by the Brazzaville and Monrovia-Group led by Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia. Relying on evidence of what had been achieved under that model, it is clear it is a failed model and hoping to achieve any kind of progress by continuing to pursue the so-called ‘cooperation of African unity at the intergovernmental level’, is akin to doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results. I say, enough of doing things the old ways, do you not all think?

Whilst we have realised, and it is not in doubt in fact, that the culture of bureaucracy inherited under the so-called Brazzaville and Monrovia-group model has since been what is reproducing the development of underdevelopment within African governments collectively. This manifesto, therefore, calls for the abolition of bureaucracy and for the re-examination of the Pan-Africanism Declaration advocated by the Casablanca-group led by the late former president Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana, and it had in fact had been the originating idea of the Pan-Africanism movement that mobilised Africans for our independence from western colonial rule – the inspiration of our forefathers W.E.B Du Bois, and others, and the Trinidadians George Padmore, and others.

We say that governmental integration of all African states into a single national body in creating a unified ethnopublican nationalism state structure is the inevitable pathways to our social and economic development to align in parallel formation with global corporatist socio-economic customs. I say, to bolster sustainable economic self-sufficiency subsistence of the divided African nations, we must begin the radical deconstruction of all external and internal agencies that are fortifying the walls of divisions around our African economy and the intergovernmental relations, and to reconstruct all African nations into a single national body for the sake of our economic empowerment, social progress and governmental structure – all for the benefits of our younger generations.

Here and now, I claim we are no longer in the age-of-modernity; we are now in the age-of-revelation, in which advances in computer-intelligence’ web-internetisation and its’ accompany open-data, open-access and free-culture is now defining the social and economic lives of people everywhere else outside of Africa. It is within the socio-economic condition of the emerging age-of-revelation that the emergence of the Restoration-era in Africa I speak of manifest.

Everywhere we looked, we see many countries around the world investing enormous resources into the restoration-era that is advancing and defining the socio-economic lives of people in their societies, with their proclaimed common-unity of socio-economical interests – a strand of the Stone-Age era; the computer-intelligence and technological boom in China, the western societies in Europe, America and Canada dragging one another along collectively with computer-intelligence and global economic-internetisation, India is following suit with the production of mass computer software developers and corposense arousing the awe of web-intelligentsias the world over, Russia, Australia, Switzerland, and New-Zealand too, whilst African states governments are still nurturing protégé society and the now outdated proclaimed common-unity of ethnicity or race in some, and religion in others.

I say, Nay, it is time Africans rise with the current happenings of global restoration-era spreading economic and social advances all over the world, including in the social life force of every African descent in the Diasporas. Ethnopublican state is, of course, will reproduce the development of global corporatism and economic equality of all to the exception of no other in Africa, and the flow of computer-intelligence will develop on African soil and fosters more rapidly across boundaries. And here it becomes clear, that capitalism is no longer operational and unfit for any longer to be the economic platform in the global economy in our current 21st-century generation of the age-of-revelation, and political governing system that capitalism imposed in its regulation of socio-economic conditions of existence is ill-equipped to operate on the platform of web-internetisation operations and marketing, and also is unfit to manage or control or regulate efficiently the driving force of the global computer-intelligence industry advance cultured ways of life, crime and its socio-economic culture combined.

African society can no longer continue to nurturing the condition of hopelessness under this condition of doing much and achieving little, if not none. Our economic, social and government existence is no longer compatible with the condition of protégé-society, political institution, republican state and the common-unity of proclaiming our nationalism-culture based on race, ethnicity or religion. The essential condition for the existence and the sway of global corporatism is the development of computer-intelligence as an economic tool operating on the platform of web-internetisation, with its speeding up expansion of free online-trading and e-marketing. The installation of the proposed ethnopublican states of Africa would derail the very foundation on which the economic relations of protégism, foreign agents’ domineering power relationship and dictating terms and conditions over the divided African governments’ individual relationship with them, and the condition of a unified African ethnopublican states would be the outcome that will define the social, economic and nationalism-culture of African societies and would affect a force for good in the social life of Africans in the Diasporas.

What the govox-populi governmental institution, therefore, would produce mainly, is the governmental platform of African citizenry as state decision-makers; where what would have existed under the dominion right of politics which involves groups of government officials responsible for making state-centred decisions on affairs of the state, are now split into smaller units of legislative lines of government across ethnopublican states’ regions across Africa, and made possible and efficient by computer-intelligence in place of a minority of government officials congregated in a single building all year round making state-centred decisions that affect large populations of people in their society. In effect, citizenry-electorates would be the primary support service-arms responsible for the decision-making output of the Citizenry-legislative-arm of government that was once dominated by political government officials. Unlike republican state where government officials can choose to not carry out the promises they made to citizenry-electorates to secure their votes at elections, ethnopublican state placed the legislative-power of government in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates to make state-centred decisions.

Besides the fact that citizenry-electorates have state-power to accept, reject, or adapt the ideologies or proposals that are introduced to them by the govoxiers, or to amend the laws impose on them by the StateLords power of state judiciary interpretation, the structure of ethnopublican state makes it easy for citizenry-electorates to change the direct translations of the law to suit their purpose as they so wish. To emulate Karl Marx, in his ‘Communist-Manifesto’ (1848): ‘The fall of all independent-leadership form of state governments in human society and the rise of interdependent-leadership that places citizenry-electorates as the legislative-power holder of the state, are equally inevitable‘.

CHAPTER TWO

THE ETHNOPUBLICAN STRUCTURE OF AFRICAN STATES

The proposed Ethnopublican state of Africa will make up and will embed in the African nationalism-structure of StateLords. The regulatory-codes of Govoxical-decentralisation guides the office of the major groupings such as the economic-group, the citizenry-group, and the secretariat-group, while the office of the StateLord is guided by Supervisory-Codes; and each of these groups of govoxiers will have their official seats at the proposed African House-Of-StateLords Assembly.

In volume-1 of this Manifesto, the term ethnopublic, which literally means ‘community of government of the people’, I defined as ‘a community of people or nation relatively governed based on the common-unity of the people’. Ethnopublic is a nationalism-structure in which citizenry-electorates and their elected government officials have shared-control of the administration of government and the decision-making power of the State is held by citizenry-electorates.

In an ethnopublican state, the affairs of a country is considered a “citizenry matter” and only citizenry-electorates takes state-centred decisions, and not the affairs of government officials or the Head-of-state. The installation of government officials to an office within an ethnopublican state is secured through the voting-process by populocracy or populocratic voting-process, and not through democracy, autocracy or any other form. With the Age-of-revelation, because it reflects the proclaimed common-unity of socio-economical interests that is the driving force of the restoration-era in our current generation the world over, will make advances toward the concept of the proposed ethnopublican nationalism-structure to become the opposing structure of both monarchy and republican nationalism-structure.

The proposed govox-populi structure of government has no scope to recognise any self-imposed body in government and therefore has no elective government officials with the legislative-power to make state-centred decisions including the decisions that direct the day-to-day administration of government. The state of the environment in which the ethnopublican nationalism-structure exists, affects the area in which govox-populi institution of government acts, and in which the govoxiers operates, and where the citizenry-electorates exercise power, and how the office of StateLords exercise supervisory control.

Everywhere we looked, we see sovereign states’ governments eagerly disposed to proclaiming their nationalism-structure of state to be ‘republic’, and republican structure of government was developed with a scope that harmonises a mixed-form of constitutional governance, such as the different arrays of democracies, aristocracy, oligarchy, constitutional-monarchy, ethnocracy, autocracy, and such like.

When Aristotle, in his writing titled: “Politics”, theorised for creating a mixed-form of the constitutional system of governance, he warned about the chaotic process of what he term: ‘kyklos or anacyclosis’ that State governments would encounter. The theory of republicanism that had been the manifestation of Aristotle’s theory appeared in State form in the founding of the Roman Republic in 509 B.C – that institutes the overthrow of the Monarch nationalism-structure of the state in human society. The western Modern-era that began in 1750 had experienced how the administration of politics in state governments around the world had caused wars, revolutions and the overthrown or constitutionalisation of the monarchy structure of state government into a republican one in countries around the world.

It is worth educating ourselves of the particular functioning condition or arrangements of the differences between what I called the: Nationalism-system of State Government. There had existed, heretofore, two methods of Nationalism-systems of state government in human society the world over: Monarchy and the Republican; and each with its scope that harmonises its ‘forms of government’ and their respective compatible administrative components and organisational-modes. Here and now, the ethnopublican system of state government I proposed as a third category of Nationalism-system that developed from this Manifesto, in its bare existence compared to its predecessors, I show in the diagram on next page herein:

NATIONALISM-SYSTEMS OF STATE GOVERNMENT

NATIONALISM STRUCTURE	FORMS OF GOVERNMENT	GOVERNING ADMINISTRATION	ORGANISATION MODE
Monarch	Autocracy	Dictatorship	Monocracy
Republic	Mixed-form: Democracy Oligarchy Aristocracy Constitutional-Monarchy Political-Autocracy Political-Ethnocracy	Politics	Bureaucracy
Ethnopublic	Populocracy	Govox-Populi	Commicracy

As shown in the diagram above; the administration of politics in government which involves the making of state-centred decisions by groups of government officials; appropriates the forms of governance and its accompanying organisational-mode of administration of governing, which the republican nationalism-structure of state adopts as its constitutional instruments.

Take democracy, for example, citizenry-electorates are prescribed to play an active role in the administration of government through elected representatives. But what roles citizens should partake in democratic societies are being bureaucratised and diluted through the appropriation of one or more of the other forms of governance within the scope that republican structure of state harmonises with as its framework of alternatives to one or the other; and culminates into a mixed-form of constitutional governance in any republican state the world over. In consequence, not a single republican state anywhere in the world adopts a single form of governance – it is a mixed-form of democracy with oligarchy, or democracy with ethnocracy, or democracy with constitutional-monarchy, or such like. No consensus exists, not until now, on how to resolve the conflicts that exist within republicanism.

As it is already becoming clear, democracy attached with any of the other as part of a republican constitutional form of government is desirable in theory, is it not? It is not at all clear whether the concept of a mixed-form of government as a constitutional framework is compatible with Nationalism-system of State Government anywhere, nor is it clear whether those who advocates for republican nationalism-structure realises how detrimental any mixed-form of governance conflicts wherever and whenever it is exercised? What is indeed remaining clear is the fact that everywhere a mixed-form of constitutional governance exists, we see such States’ governments or certain parts of their social system of social-control degenerates into corruption, anarchy and tyranny against citizenry-society. With the effort of police states, citizens are daily being imprisoned for protesting their populist rights, and worse, they risk death fighting for the privilege to breathe.

Whereas in practice democracy contrasts with any other forms of governance. Political-autocracy and oligarchy contrast with political-ethnocracy; likewise, aristocracy and constitutional-monarchy are in never-ending conflicts. How any republican state can hope to achieve a democratic or ordered society with a mixed-form of governance that the administration of politics appropriates, remains a mystery to the senses. I claimed that the decline of the Roman-republic in 27 B.C was caused by the norms of mixed-form of governance – the violent rhetoric of political-autocracy and disregard for democracy – have not promoted compromise and consensus in our generation, but; it merely incites us into a permanent state of conflicts and never-ending cause to ousts government officials from government office.

The issue in today’s republican state, in fact, is when democracy prescribes freedom of assembly and free speech, inclusiveness and equality, right to vote and minority rights, and when oligarchy form of governance has been imposed to deprived some sector of citizens of their so-called democratic rights, what should such state government expect from protesters-citizens, – Kisses and Roses?

When democracy prescribes state-power to be held by elected citizens as government officials and grant citizenry-electorates the voting power to do so, and when some self-imposed body such as the military super-imposed themselves as government officials and Head-of-State with an appropriation of a political-autocracy form of governance, what should citizens expect from the day-to-day administration of government and their citizenry rights, – an administration with no dictatorship with extreme bureaucratic structure?

When democracy prescribes the condition that grants decision-making power to those elected to the office of state government to pass laws and the power to appoints judiciary with varying types of governmental authority, and when a political-ethnocracy form of governance has been applied to populate higher positions in government with those from a particular ethnic group that turns out to further their interests, power and resources above others in society, how should the other ethnic groups who are now aggrieved by such state of affairs reacts, – contented and comfortable without protesting for a change of government?

We might suppose that politicians are dangerous being whenever politicians take steps to impose political-autocracy or ignore democratic norms, but how true is their offence when the very legal structure of republicanism invites them to take such steps to resolve their individual personal objectives or specific political advantage? Citizens might suppose that the solution to keeping their government free of corruption is through the act of protest and rejecting all attempts to deprive them of their democratic norms, but how possible could this be when the very foundation of republican forms of governance grant democratic rights to citizens, and endowed politicians with the concessions to employ any of the other mixed-form of governing rule whenever they feel the desire to do so?

Lest we forget that the arrogance of the monarchs for ignoring citizenry concerns had caused their loss of the monarch nationalism state government to the republican. And here history has repeated itself; because of the failure of the republican to resolve the conflicts of its mixed-form of governance and causing the populous’ never-ending urge to protest and fight for their so-called democratic right, is the proposed loss of republican nationalism system of state government in Africa to the ethnopublican proposed in this manifesto.

While the Monarch nationalism-system of government has been annihilated from state power in human society because of the tyrannical power autocracy exercised, but those who occupy monarchies by inheritance are given the concession to migrate to a republican nationalism-system of government that guarantees to secure their position as Head-of-State of their respective countries under the constitutional-monarchy mixed-form of governance with democracy. Whereas, ethnopublican nationalism-structure of the state appropriates only populocracy form of governance with a scope that migrates monarchies and republicans to fit perfectly in part of the ethnopublican components itself with no constitutional-monarchy or a mixed-form of other forms of governance with populocracy.

I say, no nationalism-system of state government would be perfect in human society anywhere – it only survives with the time of the common-unity of the proclaimed era that brought it to its existence. And, in both the Iron-Age era that brought the monarch nationalism-system into existence, and the Classical-era that brought the republican nationalism-system into existence; shows that when the eras had exhausted the existing condition of their proclaimed common-unity, they cannot conform to the developing condition of their successive eras, and as a result, the essential conditions of the developing era become the guides to which human society finds the new way of developing the nationalism-structure that fits the era in which they are developing into. And in the current age-of-revelation, the restoration-era existing within it that is the driving force of society socio-economical interests the world over is the existing condition in which ethnopublican nationalism-system of state government is now developing on account of this manifesto.

Indeed, an ethnopublic is a single sovereign state with a scope that harmonise sub-sovereign state entities that also would have all the attribution of ethnopublicanism, especially with the installation of a system of governments that would be recognised as ethnopublican by nature. For example, Her Majesty Elizabeth II the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and also the Head-of-State to Northern Ireland and of Her other realms and territories around the world and Head of the Commonwealth, also; and if we apply to Her position as Head-of-States on the structural platform of ethnopublican state, Her Majesty’s office would take supervisory control over all the office of the StateLords and ratified the citizenry appointments of StateLords in each territory and supervised the instruments of the Judicial-Arm of governments of all countries and territory in which Her current realms administer as Head-of-State. Whilst Her Majesty, being the Head-of-State, would have no influence on the day-to-day administration of government, Her citizenry appointed StateLords would have no influence in the day-to-day Administration of government with other government offices as well. And it is perfectly reasonable that the position in which Her Majesty occupied as Head-of-State would remain hereditary for reasons of national security and protection of the historical continuum of ethnopublican nationalism-structure. 

In republican states in African society at the present, we already have existing offices acting as Head-of-States in each African state, so their emigration into the office of the StateLords combined would lead to their jointly hold the shared-control of the administrative office of Head-of-State of Africa in Africa, with each responsible for the supervisory instruments within their territory, where a majority of the StateLords had to agree before any of the office of the StateLord could pass judgment in every exercise of their office supervisory duty on affairs of their respective state in Africa, and within each of their territory. In consequence, the ethnopublican StateLords, who are also the Head-of-States in Africa, would have no influence in the day-to-day Administration of government where the Secretariats, Economists and Citizenry-committees occupy.

Here, the African StateLords are occupying two roles combined: both the position of Head-of-States and that of the StateLords who holds the Judicial-Arm of government of their respective states. While the position of Head-of-State is hereditary, but the position of the StateLords is for life. And while it is perfectly reasonable that the African StateLords should occupy the position as Head-of-States also, for life, the path of this concession exists for those state migrating from the republican structure of government to an ethnopublican one.  And this is where reasons of national security and protection of the historical continuum of ethnopublican nationalism-structure manifest; that the StateLords who hold the position as Head-of-State must agree before any of the office the StateLord could pass judgment in every exercise of their office supervisory duty on affairs of all African states and within each of their territory.

However, in the context of a single sovereign state with no other sovereign entity or territorial realm attached to its nationalism state, we say there are two pathways to enter ethnopublican nationalism state structure: the republican pathway and the monarchy or constitutional-monarchy pathway. In the case of a sovereign state such as Morocco, an African country with a semi-constitutional monarchy form of governance, we say its entry into an ethnopublican state would be a constitutional-monarchy pathway; whereby His Majesty King Mohammed VI would remain as Head-of-State of Morocco with no influence in the day-to-day administration of government, and with an appointed StateLord determined through citizenry elective-process. But, in the context of an absolute sovereign Monarchy nationalism state, such as the kingdom of Eswatini with His Majesty King Mswati III as Head-of-State in Africa, and the Kingdom of Lesotho with His Majesty King Letsie III as Head-of-State in Africa, we say their entry into ethnopublican state would be a monarchy pathway; whereby the kings would remain as Head-of-States of their respective countries with no influence in the day-to-day administration of government, and with appointed StateLords determined through their State’s citizenry elective-process.

It is worth mentioning that while the ethnopublican nationalism-system defies both the model forms and administrative components of monarchy and republican nationalism-system of government, but it maintains the structural associative characteristics with them. In countries such as Morocco, Kingdom of Eswatini and Kingdom of Lesotho, their ethnopublican nationalism-system would exercise its use of the combination of hereditary and elective elements, where the election of StateLords remain citizenry-authority and nomination of successors of Head-of-State remain restricted to members of the royal bloodline. The state function of Head-of-State in an ethnopublican state varies from purely legal (crowned ethnopublic), to symbolic both by tradition and a largely official govoxical ceremonial role.

Just as, the republican institution of government caused the downfall of the monarch institution of government in human society the world over, so is the proposed ethnopublican institution of government proposed to cause the downfall of the republican institution of government in Africa. Just as, the republican state is a governmental structure with the power of decision-making where those elected as government officials make the laws, so as ethnopublican state is a governmental structure with the power of decision making where citizenry-electorates make the laws including decisions that direct the day-to-day administration of government. Just as, the evolution of republican constitution developed into joint power-sharing between the patrician who held government offices and the plebeian the citizenry-electorates in ancient Rome, so as the revolution of ethnopublican constitution maintain joint power-sharing of the control of government between government officials and citizenry-electorates.

The proposed ethnopublican states of Africa’s framework will be strong to regulate and control the proposed social and economic corporatists’ organisations in Africa. Africa’s inclusion in global economic trading will drive the economic development that will be spurred largely by the proposed executive-arm of government purpose to have a multitude of independent foreign firms coalesce with strong economic relations, both in the exportation of natural resources from Africa and direct foreign trades to operates on the ground in Africa, independently free from the monetary influence and control of the global trading functions in the world market economy.

Indeed, a mixed-form of governance is the central characteristic of a republican state – preserving the mixing of democracy with other forms as at when it suits the ruling-class best – is how the governing administration of the institution of politics serves the interests of the politicians and their capitalists-class. Democracy, though, only serves the citizens only when the ruling class is not the politically governing class. And in a capitalist society, that is literally impossible. In any republican society real power rest with those who own and controls the means of economic production and not the theoretical: ‘every citizen is expected to play an active role in governing the state‘. Democracy is the simplest way politics could control the population through the use of coercion, and obviously, a coercive tool of politics is the appropriation of mixed-form of governance they employ when it suits them best.

After all, our current 21st-century restoration-era that brought about the rise of the ethnopublican-structure of the state is an era of socio-economical interests of citizenry-society, and NOT by ethnicity, race or religion. I say, in the dethronement of the last vestige of the economic empowerment of capitalism in any given society, political institutions and their mixed-form of governance with their democratic tools would be rid with it and sidelined to history. The main issue with democracy is simply that whilst it gives citizens the right to vote, its republican structure of government makes it easily possible for political principles to impose a mixed-form of governance to offer people very limited choices. The policies imposed to direct the course of democracy are shaped by the interests of capitalists’ efforts to protect their economic interests and resources in the exploitation of citizenry’ socio-economical interests, no doubt.

In an ethnopublican state, every individual citizen is their own ethnomethodologists, their own theorists. Govoxiers, as government officials, are an independent role-player in society’ economic and social affairs, and the corporatists, marketeers, or govoxiers cannot control or dictate to individual citizens. Citizenry-electorates are the State power-holder, and they secure the Legislative decision-making instruments collectively, to which they exercise to legislate and make laws in control of themselves and their socio-economic affairs in an ethnopublican state. The factorial relationship between individual citizens and the role of govoxiers point to increasing recognition of the governing administration of govox-populi, of what I identified as in conformity and typically display the characteristics feature of the established theory of populocracy.

The ethnopublican theory of populocracy that developed as a regulatory form of govox-populi administration of government is a type of form of governing in which the State apparatus is regulated by government officials and controlled and dictated to by the electorate-citizens to further the socio-cultural interests, decision-making power and economic resources of each sector of society as the citizens deem fit. Indeed, the monarchy government ideology of ethnoism of the African ancient-society conforms to the basic definition of direct-ethnocracy in which ethnicity is the key to securing power and resources. But I maintain the theory of populocracy based on qualified rights to citizenship, and not ethnicity, religion or race affiliation to the governing apparatus in which it operates.

Since populocracy is a type of citizenry-centred form of governing in which the ethnopublican state apparatus is controlled by the citizenry-electorates of a society, it is theorised to advance the condition that individual citizen’s identity in Africa is grounded in one nationality identity as Africans, and not by race, ethnicity or religion. In consequence, the judiciary-arm which supervises the instruments of govox-populi government ensures domination by the citizenry-electorates, with no stratification of society into classes. The ethnopublican StateLords are government representatives of each regional state boundary in Africa, with a shared nationalism-system of government across African regions. Though, the raison d’être of populocracy is to ensure the healthy-individualism of all African citizenry collectively. As a result, all populist consideration are deemed necessary to secure citizenry-electorates dominance of government decisions-making on all affairs of the State and administration of government.

Govoxical theory of populocracy is characterised by the ethnopublican regulatory system – the legal system focuses on the overall shift from the preceded political protective-groups and to be replaced by the govoxical promotional-groups. That the institution of Police and Prison-system that has spread to Africa since the colonial-era will be sidelined to history and to be replaced by the institution of Lawderly and the correctional institution of Redeem-system. In fact, the institutional and physical instruments of state-power deemed necessary to secure citizenry dominance are all sets to operate on an unwritten-constitution of an ethnopublican state for a start. Like all hitherto nationalism-system of state government, ethnopublic will extend its influence into more and more areas of social life, beyond the economy, including culture, family dynamics, the quality of excellence in thoughts and manners and taste, and more.

The Designing Instrument of Govox-Populi Governing Administration

The govoxiers do not form a separate party in opposition to other govoxiers. In fact, govox-populi is not a party governing system at all, but a group of individuals elected to represent the regulation of the affairs of the state on behalf of their electorates – the citizens. Govoxiers have no interest separate or apart from those of the citizenry of which they represent. They conform to the territorial governing principles of their regional society, by which they regulate to administer individually and collectively the affairs of their respective regions; and of each conduct of citizens within their regions, in conformity with the prescribed codes-of-conduct that each regional citizenry-electorates prescribed to operate as their region’s shared values-consensus and sense of morality imbibed in law and order.

Indeed, as it is already becoming clear, govox-populi is distinguished from all hitherto institutions of administration of government anywhere in the world. I will develop the issue of defining and measuring the designing instrument of govox-populi governing administration, as the various theories of ethnopublicanism are examined to a certain extent. Next, however, I will analyse the roles of govoxiers concerning each of their branch’s regulation of the affairs of ethnopublican state:

First, in the national struggle of the citizens of a govox-populi society, the citizens of their respective States elects the StateLords to supervise the administration of the confederate state of African government from each of their respective States, as office-holder of the Supervisory-Arm of government. The govoxical office of StateLord is a life-peerage one as of qualified right, and each of their state roles is to scrutinise legislation and formerly exercised states functions within their state regional boundaries.

Unlike the StateLords, whose functions are limited to their respective regional boundaries, the office of the Secretary-Of-State handles both internal and foreign affairs of an ethnopublican state. The secretary-of-state is elected by the citizenry-electorates of all African states to take up the state’s function as the head of the African government for a term period and is elected through citizens elective-process; to independently appoint its ministers and presides over all African states’ ministries and bears ultimate responsibility for the policy and machinery of govoxical government.

The proposed Assembly-Of-StateLords Act would be drawn from the structural enactment of the ethnopublican nationalism-system, to base the StateLords territorial constitutional principles and Codes-of-Supervision (COS). The Assembly is conducted and regulated over by fourteen (14) appointed Speakers of the House-of-StateLords Assembly, whose individual appointment is attainable through citizenry elective-process, and their collective roles we vested as of the joint-head of the proposed permanent commissioning office of the Royal-Commissions from each regional county in Africa.

However, it should be mentioned that each of the 14 appointed Speakers represents each of the 14 secretariat-ministries; and at least one or more of the Speakers must be expertise in the activities of one or more of the secretariat-ministries, in the event of hearing cases of great importance on state-affairs concerning any of the Commissions they jointly head in the name of the crown-ethnopublic. As joint-head of the Royal-Commissions, they are the appointed Speakers of the House-of-StateLords Assembly, and their office is dedicated to the office of Head-of-State (crown ethnopublic); to acts in matters or affairs of the state which would otherwise require the Crown’s attendance and to regulate the affairs of the appointed commissioners in each regional Royal-Commissions in each regional counties across Africa; whose role is to conduct the function of commission of enquiry on matters of great importance and usually controversial cases made against the integrity or character of a govoxier in public office.

There are elected Lord-Governors within each state county, and Lord-Counsellors within each county’s borough; and appointed by their respective regional citizenry-electorates to carry out local functions, and both govoxical offices are supervised by the office of their respective StateLord.

The StateLords are individually responsible for the supervision of the affairs of their individual States boundary and their supervisory-powers are conferred by statute directly on the administrative-arm of government: the office of the Secretary-of-State of all African states, and passed down to its appointed States Secretariat-Ministers and each state’s Secretariat-Ambassadors, and down to their regional State’s commissioning agencies, county governors, and local councillors. The office of StateLords performs a limited number of state-laws functions that can only be exercised with the Secretary-of-State’s advice.

Monthly, the House-Of-StateLords Assembly sits to scrutinised and questions the performance of the Secretary-Of-State on its govoxical operations that relates to affairs in each of their respective State’ regions. Both the Economy-Prime Minister and the Citizenry-Prime Minister speaks to formally brought forward to the attention of the StateLords a range of respective’ citizenry issues of public importance from their respective branches and directed against the secretariats or their ministries commissioning staffs’ performance or lack thereof from each respective States. The Secretary-Of-State is obligated to must give a response, explanations, offer excuses, reasons, and time-tabled deadlines of when, how the matter complained of would be dealt with, or has already been dealt with.

Second, the secretary-of-state is the head of govox-populi government of all African states and is both responsible for the internal and foreign affairs, and also the caretaker for implementing citizenry prescribed policies in all African States’ jurisdictions, and its HomeLand-Affairs ministry works to guide both the Lord-Governors and Lord-Councillors’ offices in each regional States with its executive operational directives. The secretary-of-state is the head of the secretariat-branch of government – the executive departments for the social systems presiding over all African states. In its state capacity, it is the office of the secretary-of-state, and not any of the other branches of government, that carries out State administrative functions and is said to be the office of the Head-of-State in each State when so doing.

The ethnopublican nationalism-structure devolved the Executive-Arm of government to the office of the secretary-of-state; and conveyed the Citizenry-legislative-arm functions to the Citizenry-Prime Minister, and committed the state economic functions to the Economy-Prime Minister, and entrusted the Judicial-Arm function to the office of StateLords. The StateLords possess the State judicial power to ratify or override any decisions made by the citizenry or any government body ONLY on points of law or under the constitution; whereas the citizenry-electorates possess the legislative-power to make and enact state-laws for the executive-, economy-, and judicial-arm of government, to all and to the exception of the office of Head-of-State.

Where, in fact, the office of the Head-of-State is not part of the govox-populi government and thus not involved in the administrative or supervisory affairs of the state. Those Head-of-states who are also acting StateLords carry out StateLord functions and attend the House-of-StateLords Assembly only in StateLord capacity, and not as Head-of-States. The StateLords, we say because their position is a life-peerage one they should wear three kinds of ceremonial outfits: their coronation robes, Assembly robes, and their Decamping robes required to be worn at their state burial upon their death.

The citizenry-electorates prescribe the state legal-Guidelines within the existing state legal-Directives of ethnopublican nationalism-structure, to guide the governing instruments of ethnopublican state, and thus the state remain the property of the African citizenry society, and its emblemised symbol is at the House-Of-StateLords Assembly to ensure its observance of laws and rules on all affairs of the state and in the administration of the government as at when the operation of any interpretations of law and enforcement of guidelines exercised by the StateLords requires it.

Therefore, the executive-arm of government occupied by the secretary-of-state is the govoxical head of government. And the citizenry-legislative-arm of government is the govoxical law-makers, decision-makers, and the body with the power of elective-process to legitimatise the citizenry shared-control of state government administration by govox-populi.

While the office of the secretary-of-state is entitled, under the govoxical-decentralisation directives, to independently appoint its secretariat-ministers from anywhere across all African states including from the Diasporas, but the offices of the StateLords, Citizenry-Prime Minister and Economy-Prime Minister cannot independently appoint their commissioners.

While citizenry-electorates handle the elective appointments of the StateLords, secretary-of-state, citizenry-prime Minister, economy-prime minister and their deputies, but the working-group are solely responsible for electing economic-unionists to take government office status under the regulatory office of the Economy-branch of government, while regional citizenry-electorates handle the elective appointments of their regional citizenry-committee members under the regulatory office of the Citizenry-branch of government, including all regional Lord-Governors and Lord-Councillors under the direct regulation of the Judicial-branch of government.

At the House-of-StateLords Assembly, citizens’ national struggles are operationally directed at the Secretary-of-state; to implement and carry out its office election promises, to make materials and sustainable development available to their communities’ social and economic advances, to make provisions for more housing, businesses or roads, and more. In the various stages of regulations which the Secretary-of-state and its secretariat-ministers and ambassadors have to pass through, they always and everywhere represent the interests of the citizenry. The office of the Secretary-of-state, therefore, is the enforcer of state functions and resolute views put to its ministries at the Assembly.

The office of the StateLords supervise the performance of secretariats over the great mass of their respective State’s citizens, and rely on their regional citizenry-electorates to unceasingly engaging with their regional citizenry-committees through their local Lord-Councillors’ office and taking advantage of their govoxical legislative-power to take charge of every administrative process in improving their socio-economical interests, needs and wants, in the conditions of economic and social advances of their villages and townships.

The stately aims of the StateLords in their respective States are the same as that of the majority of their citizens – the electorates who are also the joint state power-holders to legislate and influence every decision-making of the government at their national level. If we are to achieve economic and social advances, to make reality a robust welfare system, to exercise personal individual development and freedom, to institute trusted surveillance and effective security around Africa, for citizens to be in control of their social security and economic empowerment as a group; the govoxical populocratic voting exercise by citizenry-electorates for and against policies submitted to the House-of-StateLords Assembly is absolutely necessary.

Citizenry-committees from each regional county across Africa handle their respective counties engagements with economic and social issues that affect them as it is developing at the House-Of-StateLord Assembly. And by being responsible, we say they should exercise their entitlement to hold regular townships and villages meetings with their citizens-electorates, to conduct the bi-weekly local regional voting exercise on a wide range of issues put forward to the citizens and to advance the citizens decisions and interests forward to ratify by the office of the StateLords on matters of social and economic importance at every stage of development at the House-of-StateLord Assembly.

The primary role of both citizenry-prime minister and economy-prime minister is to exercise the duty of their governing instruments in securing the demands of the people they serve in every govoxical function at the StateLords-Assembly. Here, I submit a table of compare and contrast to show the shared control of powers among the four branches of government in an ethnopublican state.

SHARED CONTROL OF POWER AMONG THE 4 BRANCHES IN ETHNOPUBLICAN STATE

STATELORDS	SECRETARIATS	ECONOMISTS	CITIZENRY
Voted to office for life	Voted to office for a 6 year period	Voted to office for a 4 year period	Voted to office for a 4 year period
Hold the Judicial-Arm of government.	Hold the Executive-Arm of government.	Hold the Economic-legislative-Arm of government.	Hold the Citizenry-legislative-Arm of government
The head of the state judiciary, and is the Supervisory-Arm of government over the Administrative-Arm of government	The head of the state government, and is the head of the Administrative-Arm of government	The head of the state economy, and is part of the Administrative-Arm of government	The head of the state citizenry-electorates, and is part of the Administrative-Arm of government
Acting office of state judiciary, and the interpreter of the constitution and state legal-Directives.	Acting office of state executive-regulator of other government offices, and state policy implementer.	Acting head of the state economic operation, and council of state economic advisers.	Acting head of the citizenry-electorates, and regulator of state legislators and decision-makers.
Interprets the law and state constitution in its supervisory duty over the administrative government offices. And it exercise scrutiny over them in ensuring that each of their prescribed rules and regulations operates in accordance with the citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines.	Execute state policies and programs adopted by the legislature into effect. And it is the administrative machinery that extends its operational directives to state service-delivery of public utilities.	Manage the industrial economic activities of citizens, both public and private ones, such as trade, staffing and individual acquisition of skills, training and education as necessary.	Citizenry-electorates is its primary service-arm, and they prescribe administrative laws from regional-level up to the national level, and make state-centred decisions concerning government relations with foreign countries.
Majority of the StateLords had to agree before the office of any of the StateLords could pass judgment.	Directed and responsible for the State Ministerial offices, and the smooth operations of other government offices.	Directed and responsible for the working-group and all economic industries in the country.	Directed and responsible for coordinating the citizenry-electorates in their legislative duties, and it is the governmental advisory-body for the electorates.
In an emergency, the StateLords do not make any decisions, interim or otherwise.	In an emergency, the secretariats have the power to make interim decisions, pending the decision of the citizenry.	In an emergency, the interim decision of the secretariats would override that of the economists, pending decisions of the citizenry.	In any event, the decision of the citizenry-electorates overrides that of other government offices, on condition that it passed the test of the judiciary instruments.
The office of StateLords does not make constitutional proposals, and their interpretations of policies are bound by the State constitution.	The offices of the secretariats can make constitutional proposals, and they are greatly influenced by the experts.	The offices of the economists can make constitutional proposals, but they must be supported by the decision of the working-group in an elective-process.	The offices of citizenry-committee can make constitutional proposal, but they must be supported by the decisions of citizenry-electorates in an elective-process.
Could approve or disapprove laws submitted to it to ratify by the administrative-branch of government.	Could propose laws and decisions to be made by the citizenry-electorates.	Could propose laws and decisions to be made by the citizenry-electorates.	Could make new laws and amend existing laws to suit its purpose and needs.

We based the role that is ascribed to the govoxiers on the ideas and principles that have been discovered in the recognition of our current 21st-century generation expanding socio-culture of populocracy. The contemporary global web-internetisation civilisation, with its free flow of information, open-data, open-access, and economic and social movement, is a process I defined as in conformity with the established theory of global Corporatism, and I advanced as an economic system that is extremely govitised.

The global economic web-internetisation of corporatism and its proposed accompanying govox-populi governing institution denotes a clear shift from the past generation ethics of capitalism and their political institution governing system. Govoxical governing system is what I identified as in conformity with the ethics of corporatism both in theory and practice that the developing age-of-revelation is developing its restoration-era into in our modern 21st century global cultured way of life. Although global corporatism is an ongoing process and still in its infancy, and I believe the developing theory of ethno-corporatism and its accompanying govox-populi governing administration with its populocratic governing tools will mark both a substantive and progressive permanent socio-economic change in alignment with global corporatism in the proposed Homeland-of-Africa ethnopublican states.

Govity Form of Government by Commicracy

The govoxical populocratic tools of governance are the guided management to the proposed govox-populi administration of the government by the citizenry-electorates that provide a clear and authoritative account of the importance of govity instruments in understanding the governance in an ethnopublican state.

The definition of govity as a governing instrument is still relatively little explored by academic theorists. However, in my review, I distinguish between the forms or framework of govoxical governance, such as the proposed populocracy as its instrument, and the govity of instrumentality. Therefore, the term ‘Govity’ I defined as the consensual and guided management of public affairs; a govoxical organised unit; or the administration of government where a citizenry-centred organisational group exercise governance. This defined populocracy as a form of govoxical structure in which the state apparatus is controlled by the citizenry-electorates to further the interest of citizenry society collectively, their collective power and shared resources as citizenry affairs.

Therefore, the theory of govox-populi conform the definition of govity to ethnopublicanism. The proliferation of social actors across public affairs, voluntary sectors, and the govitised coordination instruments they employed that have become a thriving virtual ecosystem have been noticed in an ever-increasing number everywhere around the world, such as the environmental eco-activism popularly attributed to Greta Thunberg on the youth climate movement; the GovCity politics and policy movement on a shared belief of the collective force of those who are intolerant of the status quo and cultures that prevent positive-forward movement on initiatives that matters and sufficient to exercise positive disruption to the old conditions of existence; and the Internet-Society’s mission that is promoting the development of the internet as a global technical infrastructure – a resource to enrich people’s lives, to build community to foster participation and leadership in areas important to the evolution of the internet – as a force for good in human society the world over, Helena-Centre for Deliberate Democracy, Generation Smart Cities through Data Governance, and more.

The socio-culture of our 21st-century current generation has brought out a new socio-cultural paradigm: consensual management of public affairs, or the administration of the government by a citizenry organisational group, in which public policies are being forced upon the government, organised from within a sector of lifelong academics or powerful interest groups with a resilient background in activism. Injustices are occurring to citizenry society from local levels to the national level, and at international level also.

I should emphasise that some of these are at the risk of fighting back against the interplay of capitalist interests inherited from the past generations, and of masking the corrupt power-grab relations within the political administration of governments everywhere across the world. No political governments everywhere would ever be proactive in protecting the environment or develop the constitutional desire to promote any positive-forward movement on initiatives that matters to the global corporatist economy without being populocratically forced to do so, because the regulatory frameworks of mixed-form of governance operating under the political governing administration have an inferior capacity to that of govoxical populocratic frameworks proposed to work under the govox-populi governing administration, and thus our current generation republican governments cannot meet their citizenry desired anywhere.

For example, the negotiation of major infrastructures led by Davephine Tholley, Sierra Leonean civil engineer, advocates to reforest water catchment areas on the hills of Freetown with the help of volunteers from the communities, reforesting urgent need locations, and engaged to seek the support of Water Directorate, Western Area Rural District Council, in tackling the challenges on how water sources were not enough to serve their community and many more of such around the world.

There is the environmental policy movement led by a Nigerian environmentalist Michael David Terungwa, – the African Green Movement (AGM) founded with some other African environmentalists working in Rwanda, Kenya, Tanzania, Senegal, Ghana and the DR-Congo – with a vision to inspire young Africans to protect the environment, embrace agriculture and sustainable living – owing to the climatic changes in rainfall patterns, flooding, drought, crops failure and low yield in farm produce, including the shrinking of the Lake Chad in Africa.

There is also the urban Cairo Cycling Geckos initiatives determined to empower women and reduce urban gender inequality by breaking social taboos led by Nouran Salah, an Egyptian heroine of our global revelation-age – changing mentality to tackle the social constraints young women face growing up in a patriarchal system.

I should also mention the new social policy movements – Community Advice Offices South Africa (CAOSA) – ensuring that marginalised and vulnerable communities and individuals have easy access to justice, social services and legal support that can effectively apply to advance their human rights in South-Africa. “It is unfortunate,” Tshenolo Tshoaedi, the Executive director at CAOSA said, on quote: “that governments don’t think that people need to vent injustice. No matter how many policies you write, if the local officials do not know how to translate them to communities with tangible actions, the injustice continues at a local level”.

I say, under the governing administration of govox-populi local officials such as the proposed Lord-Councillors in an ethnopublican society would not be levied with the responsibility to translate policies submitted to their offices by their regional citizenry-electorates. When citizenry-electorates submit policies to their local Lord-Councillor’s office, where all policies related to the economy would be passed on to the regional economic-unionist’s office for performance, who would have it passed on to the office of the StateLords through the economy-prime minister for performance by the StateLords before ending up at the secretary-of-state office for execution.

However, if the policy is related to matters other than the economy it is passed on to the regional citizenry-committee office for performance, who then submits it to the office of the StateLords through the citizenry-prime minister for translation and interpretation to ensure its compatibility under the existing laws and guidelines of the constitution, before committing it to the office of the secretary-of-State for execution under the operation of one or more of its secretariat-ministries. If the policy or any part thereof raises a question of law, the StateLord would make this known at their national monthly address to the State at the Assembly – where the policy would either be rejected, or amended, or approved.

However, it should be mentioned that not all policies submitted to the Lord-Councillors get to the StateLords for translation or directions. There would be what would be known as the state’s ‘Doctrine of Lord’s Precedent’ that applies to the office of Lord-Governors, Citizenry-committees and Economic-Unionists; where policies of the same-same would be bound by the past decisions of the StateLords or earlier decisions of the StateLords’ Assembly on the same point relative to the rules-of-law or constitutional direction.

So, for example, the office of the citizenry-committee is bound to examine new policies submitted to it with other precedent ones deposited at the Assembly library repository – which would be done through computer artificial-intelligence to match words and phrases between documents. It is the primary role of citizenry-committee, economic-unionists and Lord-Governors to understand when and if a past StateLord’s decision on similar matters is binding on subsequent policy submission his or her office is dealing with. It can mean the difference between sending such matters to the StateLords and getting tongue-lashed in response for perpetrating abuse-of-process, or advancing it to the secretariat-ministry regional ambassadors for execution.

But, howeve, if a secretariat-ambassador felt that the matter submitted to its office need to be overruled in a particular circumstances or that the citizenry-committee commissioner had been mistaken in interpretation of the ‘Doctrine of Lord’s precedent’ in a particular case, it would be advanced to the office of the secretary-of-state, whom, after examining the matter would either have it sent back to the secretariat-ambassador’s office for execution or advanced it to the office of StateLord for scrutiny and interpretation. The StateLords’ Assembly can either overrule one of its precedents to maintain consistency in the constitution by following the basic constitutional guidelines apply to the circumstances why such a decision had to be made in the current case.

Also, if a citizenry-committee or economic-unionist regards a policy as having no prospect of being successfully implemented in the affairs of the state, it has the power to reject it and to be sent back to the Lord-Councillor’s office. At this stage, the concerned citizenry group – either the working-group from a sector or regional citizenry-electorates have two choices: to either accept the reject recommendation point of view and reworked their policy and have it sent back to its office for performance, or disagreed with it by advancing the matter to the Lord-Governor’s office, who then would add its view on the matter before advancing it directly to the office of the StateLord for scrutiny and interpretation; whereupon the StateLord would seek the view of the Secretary-of-State on such matter before it before making its final ruling at the open Assembly.

This is also to show that while the Lord-Governors are bound by the ‘Doctrine of Lord’s precedent’, together with the citizenry-committees and economic-unionists, but only the Lord-Governors has no power to reject, propose an amendment or approve policies submitted to its office for performance. We say that the Lord-Governor’s duty is to apply the ‘Doctrines of Lord’s precedent‘ on every case matter before it and to advance all cases directly to the office of the StateLords for interpretation or ratification – because the Lord-Governors and Lord-Councillors are elected commissioners for the judicial-branch of government, and they are regulated directly by the office of their respective StateLords. Matters only arrive at the Lord-Governors’ offices only when such matters have been directly rejected by any of the offices of citizenry-committees or economic-unionists. And, while the citizenry-committees and economic-unionists have the power to reject or propose recommendations to policies before them, the Lord-Governors has no such powers other than to add its view to matters – views purposively directed to strengthen or influenced the decisions of the StateLords on matters advanced from its office to the StateLords for interpretation and directions.

Over and above defining the term ‘govity’, and the govoxical populocratic form of governance, including the governing administration of govox-populi, the interplay between govoxiers and citizenry-electorates in an ethnopublican state, and citizenry as primary policymaker have both highlighted the new developing organisational-mode of the administration of government instruments – both for the consensual management of public affairs, and the administration of the government of a citizenry-electorates in their control and direction of their society.

The govox-populi instrumentation and its choice of populocratic tools and organisational-mode of administrative operation are treated as a kind of evidence of a purely commissioning form of governance. A government that is administered primarily by commissioning that are staffed through citizenry elective-process of government officials; I mean, citizenry elective commissioning government officials; or any organisation in which action is carried out for a specific purpose by insistence on transparent procedures and conformity to general guidelines or standards. This instrumentation organisational-mode of administrative structural operation is what I called: govity form of governance by commicracy.

I applied the word ‘commicracy’ (a direct portmanteau of ‘commissioning rule’ or a paraphrased interpretation: ‘to rule by commissioning’). The word commicracy was borrowed from old French word: commission, originally from Latin ‘commissio‘ meaning “sending together”. The term: ‘cracy‘, originally from old French: ‘cratie‘, meaning “rule”; both words combined make the English word ‘Commicracy’; which literally means ‘sending together to rule’, or a paraphrased interpretation ‘to rule together’ – a definition that highlights the operational character of commicracy. Under the administration of govox-populi, I defined the term “commicracy” as an organisational-mode of administrative structure in which the elected government officials are commissioned to exercise shared-governance of a society together with the citizenry-electorates, where citizenry-electorates directly deliberate and decide on legislation and make state-centred decisions to direct the day-to-day administration of government.

Nationalism-system of Government has structure, form or framework, administrative method, and its conductive organisational-mode that guides its administrative structure. The administrative properties of governing instruments are justification for appropriating their administrative structure and the applicability of their form. The nationalism-structure is merely the body of their methods that allows them to operate as an autonomous entity. A good deal of commicratic administrative structural organisation of governing that we can devote to the instrumentation method of ethnopublican structure of the state is marked by a functionalist orientation, with six basic characteristic features:

1. Citizenry policies are conceived as pragmatic – that is, policy guided by practical human experience and observation through a real-life event that must be approached to regulating state governmental day-to-day operations via govoxical populocratic instruments;
2. Citizenry policies reflect the developing socio-culture of a society from the human personal experiences from which it generates – that is, a policy that defines the nationalism-culture belonging to the present time of its society and the only question they raise relate to whether the new policy can be consistent as reasonably possible to be guided by its precedent guidelines;
3. Citizenry-policies are extremely helpful because each serves as the central ‘good arguable case’ to clarify the test for StateLords’ jurisdiction – that is, the constitutional guidelines which the citizenry policymaker with the direct experience must reach when seeking to show the relevance of commicratic instruments and evaluating the effects they create.
4. Citizenry-policies would be productive by the many works on its implementation – that is, faced with the deficiencies of bureaucratic tools, the developing new commicratic instruments would be pragmatic in societal aim and also would be the designing govoxical populocratic instruments to enable govoxiers coordination of the govox-populi instruments in planning, organisation, and achieving consensus across government and with the citizenry.
5. Citizenry-policies would always raise questions of govoxical sociology – that is, StateLord’s analyses would often take as their point of departure either the importance of specific policy intentions or the extremity of social challenges of modern society.
6. Citizenry-policies would make choices and combinations of govoxical populocratic instruments a central issue – that is, approved policies would create an integrative convergence of guidelines and laws that directs public policy to be truly conceived to manage and regulating its society.

Also, I argue that the proposed commicratic organisational-mode of the administration of government instrumentation is a significant avenue for reflection of our societal development heretofore in human society, primarily because the ethnopublican nationalism-system of government produces its distinct effect in direct opposition to the monarch monocratic operational-mode of the administration of government instruments, and contrast entirely with the republican bureaucratic organisational-mode.

Indeed, it is the case that bureaucracy organisational-mode of administration becomes increasingly polity and clever at achieving aims by indirect or deceitful methods and thus developed into a fragile culmination of a series of equivalence agreements between the mixed-form of governance that invoked the wrath of the multitude of citizenry activists and interests groups that continually seek to differentiate and separate the essential qualities between mixed-form of governance, such as between democracy and oligarchy, or between democracy with political-autocracy, or with political-ethnocracy, or such like. The mode of administration and the forms of governance that drives the administration of state governing reveals the true effects of its governmental system and its interpretation of its nationalism-structure of the state.

The govity form of governance by commicracy aims to explain the significance of a govoxical sociological approach to the proposed govoxical populocratic public policy instruments in accounting for the importance of citizenry-electorates as primary policy-maker for the state. I identify the basic characteristic features of govoxical populocratic policy instruments and the process of govoxical instrumentation, to analyse the character of the administrative organisational-mode of commicracy. The govox-populi administration of government aims at concretely integrating the convergence of ethnopublican legal-Directives and citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines to shape the features of the ethnopublican nationalism-structure of a particular state by using its society govoxical populocratic policy framework.

Indeed, the question of who should have the power to make policy for the state is a major issue in republican states everywhere. And since a mixed-form of governance reveals the ambiguous relationship between the government and the governed: And while each form of governance instrument makes up their separate methods of social control and ways of exercising it, but a mixed-form merely makes up a condensed form of knowledge about social control and how it should be exercised.

It is indeed indisputable that all forms of governance instruments do not produce neutral effects – each possesses distinct quality and characteristics and completely different to another – that is, each produces distinct effects, dependent upon the aim pursued; the aims we ascribed to them, which structure their interpretations and translation of policies in the glaze of the law according to their features.

The theory of commicracy therefore proposed in this manifesto the use of govoxical populocratic framework for the analysis of policy instrument to analyse the structure of ethnopublican state, its administrative law, and in which directions that the organisational-mode of commicracy would continue to develop the govox-populi administration of governing overtime within its ethnopublican nationalism-structure.

CHAPTER THREE

ETHNOPUBLICAN-STATE AND COMMICRACY

Commicracy! What do we understand by commicracy? The theory is universalistic in scope and wide-ranging in purpose and comprises any kind of administration of service in action by directive regulation. One speaks of a dependency relationship between two distinct existences; one may speak of the direct administration of Nature over the universe; of the biological dependence of our body organs to individually contributing their genetic inheritance and ageing prerequisites to our well-being and condition of life; another speaks of the heteronomy of service-labourers to receive job information, instruction, and sometimes training from their employers so that everyone in a party to a contract service agreement knows what they are expected to do; another may speak of the agreed consensus in marriage between a husband and the wife in terms of decision-making experience and the joint control over household finances, highest levels of equality in terms of house chores and childcare responsibility, and more general power-sharing within the household.

My proposed theory of commicracy, of course, is not based upon its various other applicable purposes. Here, I speak of commicracy only in its administration in state government, or its isonomous condition of equality between the rulers and the ruled, between the government and its citizens, and between the govoxiers and their citizenry-electorates.

Govox-populi administration of government appropriates the commicratic mode of organisation. The relationship between commicracy and the law – the law is defined in terms of the rule or body of rules of conduct inherent in human nature that leads the judicial-branch of government to translate citizenry policies binding upon human society, and the notion that StateLords and their processes make up the ideal for citizenry-electorates decision-making binding upon the government in a govoxical society. Administrative law, under commicracy, is the body of guidelines and regulations and orders and decisions created by citizenry-electorates for the commicrats – the administrative commissioning staff of government.

I applied the theory of commicracy to operate within the administrative organisational-mode of government in the management of public affairs. As a result, the term commicracy is associated with the organisational-mode of administration – a conventional, hassle-free procedure with managerial freedom and does not impose commicrats’ initiatives on matters of public affairs above that of the citizenry they govern. Commicratic administrative law, in this context, protects the accomplishment of social purposes, is concerned with citizenry isonomic rights and in their public duties, regulates the efficiency of administrative procedures to its isonomous effect, safeguard and reconcile conflicting interests. Administrative law, therefore, is concerned with the organisational-mode of govox-populi government where all branches of government occupy.

As it is already becoming clear, the relationship of govox-populi administration of state government to the law is isonomous. In one prevalent view, the government is essentially distinct from, and in heteronomous service relationship dependent upon, citizenry-electorates. Govoxiers seek solutions from citizenry-electorates to resolve social problems. This means that they do not come up with their own operational or administrative law imposed upon society; it is imposed on the administration of their state office by the citizenry-electorates. This relationship of govox-populi administration of state government to the law, and the heteronomous relationship dependent upon decision-making of citizenry-electorates, is relative to the theory of Isonomy – equality of all citizens in an ethnopublican state under the law, and equality in governance between the government and the governed in govoxical society.

As a result, the palaver-system which is the proposed court-system in African ethnopublican state would approach questions of law in heteronomous relationship dependent upon law-making by citizenry-electorates. While the proposed Law & Human Rights Commission is charged with carrying out palaver programs and the administration of its social systems of social control, which the secretariat HomeLand-Affairs is tasked to provide it with its executive operational directives in each county regions across Africa, but the office of Lord-Governors is charged with the staffing of palaver court judges and their staffs, including to regulating them. Here, while the Honourable judges and their staffs do not receive their executive operational directives from the judicial-branch of government in which they occupy, even though they preside on the sanctity of the law and commits to state duty in the same fashion as the StateLords, but their direct official directives is strictly tied with the secretariat-branch of government and thus they operates as commissions as part of the state executive-arm of government. The Honourable judges and their staffs would be regulated by secretariat situations and govoxical institution of the executive-arm of government, independent of the judiciary-arm.

My proposed theory of commicracy, therefore, in its service to citizenry-society, has been the manifestation of the ethnopublican state. The theory of ethnopublicanism with its dependable govoxical populocratic form of governing I recognised with the irresistible propping organisational-mode of its commicratic instruments and the distinct commissioning status of govoxiers. With republican nationalism-system of state government, for example, we see how the development of mixed-form of governing accompanied the jostling of the republican nationalism-structure to extend its reach to unite the administration of political governance under its bureaucratic mode of organisation. Whereas, when we looked back on the administrative operation of the monarch nationalism-system of state government, we see how the maintenance of a single form of autocratic governance was a sign of its dictatorship administrative unity and its full capacity to implement its monocratic mode of operations, without requiring the monarch nationalism-structure to extend its reach to unite its instruments under its sovereignty.

The sole populocratisation of the ethnopublican state, therefore, typically provides the basis for its commicratisation because the governing form of populocracy eliminated all other forms of governing instruments from its framework. As a result, all those states migrating from monarch nationalism-structure or forms of constitutional-monarch of governance to ethnopublican nationalism-structure would develop additional governmental commicratic agencies dedicated to serving the crown and unify the Head-of-states with their subjects.

In the proposed ethnopublican states of Africa, we would establish strong citizenry-centred commicratic agencies responsible for a wide range of public utilities that would regulate the non-monetary services to the public (such as health-care, education and the lot, including the proposed autonomous Ropodium carrier road transportation, and technological device that allows individual households to self-generating their electricity power provision directly from the sun, and more like), extracting monetary revenues from foreign trading, and assign great social importance to the surviving existence of the revered position of our ancient crown Head-of-states. Through the proposed ethno-corporatist economic revolution in Africa, we would motivate powerful modernising ambitions, centralised the African states into a unified ‘One’ Nation-state with a singular govoxical administration of government, and create the proposed powerful commicracy.

The monarch’s powerful autocracy form of governance wielded the monocratic administrative functions until the republican civil-service bureaucratic administrative functions emerged. Human society has since been emigrating their monarch nationalism-structure of state government into the republican bureaucratic mode of organisations, giving us the appearance of a republican state appropriating the constitutional-monarchy form of governance.

In some sovereign states at present, there still exists some absolute monarch state government purporting to wield the monocratic administrative functions. But, when we looked more closely, we see the actual realisation of monocratic administrative operations was a patchwork – with their arrays of policies borrowing terms and conditions from political-autocracy and integrating republican styled bureaucratic mode of organisation in some of their social systems of social control, reflecting responses to specific problems of incompatibility between an economic-system of a society and the nationalism-structure employ to guide its administration, with their arrays of a complicated system of dictatorship authority wholly incompatible with our human society 21^st-century expanding populocratic socio-culture everywhere in the world.

Progressively, human societies have advanced to appropriate the administration of state government to a republican structural functioning in response to clear failures of the monarch system of government by one person only. The inability of the dictatorship administration of governance to deal with economic crisis or to function effectively in warfare, the sense of complacency that naturally springs from the monocratic mode of operational reaction’s obdurate approach to change and of what is new, historical social and economic progress that rise and disappear in the culture of their tyranny – this misconception they inherited from the ancient monarch nationalism-structure different from our 21st-century socio-culture. I say, any social systems of social-control with no organisational-mode of administration are inefficient and not even close to being called progressive.

With the proposed ethnopublican nationalism-structure, govoxical populocratic function would strengthen the govox-populi administration of state government and citizenry bases of commicratic administrative mode of organisation to guard against the malignant influences of state-centred corruption that exists in bureaucratic organisation, a lack of accountability that existed in monocratic operation, and the patronage malpractices of granting favour or giving contracts or making appointments to office in return for support to be elected into government offices that is endemic in political societies. Here and now, owing to the efforts of populocracy in establishing citizenry-centred commicracies have gained integrative influence in the theory of govox-populi, emphasising economic centralisation and decentralised citizenry-based decision-making on affairs of the state and, of course, even the replacement of monetary-economy everywhere to the non-monetary economy at the national level.

Indeed, we say that to increase flexibility and adaptability within the govox-populi administration of governance and to make the heteronomous service relationship of government dependency on citizenry-electorates’ decision-making more performance-orientated to its isonomous effect, the commicratisation of our ethnopublican state must be comprehensively applied in the moral sense and social fabrics of our African society collectively. This proposed refinement in our ethical constructs fell under the rubric of the ethnopublic proclaimed common-unity. The administrative apparatus of bureaucracy is now becoming increasingly inefficient to manage our modern fast-paced environment in the age of computerised web-internetisation networking both in our social and economic life in society that Max Weber depicted, nor has politics been able to produce the level of proficiency that the theory of direct-democracy preached was characteristic of equality of governance between the government and the governed.

In weighing the efficacy of bureaucracy in our modern political administration in government in society, it is indeed the case that, often, individuals start with a natural inclination to seek a job that could improve their financial stability, and since higher paid jobs usually placed people in a position of power and that inevitably leads to individuals to succumb to the corruptive effects of power and, in the worst-case scenario, forming a conglomerate around their position of power and money resources so they can tend directly to their remunerative ventures in state offices with ease.

The absence of institutionalised citizenry-centred scrutiny of government officials, or its associated fear of intimidation against concerned citizens thereof, has meant that state offices become a source of institutionalised corruption of power and public funds, encouraging those with the desire to profit or gain something material or financial to see government offices as their preferred profession and to deter the formation of intellectuals and academics, with the capacity to improve society, from government offices. As republican state employ a mixed-form of governance that gives politicians the power to manipulate and corrupt state power and the avenue to treat public funds as their elite’s group personal funding source, the bureaucratic organisational-mode is not designed to allow for the proficient citizenry-centred scrutiny of government officials or to seek their accountability even.

Many problems faced by the mixed-form of governance experienced in bureaucratic societies, of course, affect human society collectively, though the so-called developing countries suffer the most than those in the developed countries. The extent to which mixed-form of governance performs in accordance to the bureaucratic characterisation is related to the external circumstances governing politicians’ capabilities to govern. And most of these external circumstances we linked to the efficacy of the money-economy in human society the world over.

I say, when we abolish monetary-economy and its use-values resources are regulated under a moneyless form of resource accounting on goods and services, there would remain little basis to attract rule of rational-legal authority over equality-legal authority across government, and the administrative commicracy in state offices could act in ways that would discourage those with kleptomania tendencies from government offices, to make the govox-populi administration of government to be citizenry-centred accountable, and to make it proficient to progress human society to a form of classless society depicted by Karl Marx.

I say, when money is removed from the economic relation in society and our nationalism-structure has emigrated into the ethnopublican structure of state with all its glorious conductive administrative instruments, the institution of govox-populi responsible for the administrative machinery of commicracy would attract the right sort of qualities in government this manifesto preach, and those with the adequate skills would become naturally susceptible to actual progress and the major development we seek across Africa at the present.

The administrative apparatus of state governments since the rise of republican nationalism-structure are founded on party-system and presidential-system that develops collective-power blocks and always fighting for the attainment of legitimacy with opposing ideologies that makes elected parties struggle repeatedly to realise their interests, says little about how proximate to or distant they are from the ideal form of representative-democracy that citizenry society has an expectation for – where citizenry-electorates are given the choice to vote for political parties as opposed to individual representatives – whereas, it is within political parties collective-power blocks that the many of the problems of mixed-form of governance associated with external circumstances of individual representatives I speak of exercise legitimacy to corruption in state government.

In the proposed govoxical society, I say, it would be wholly impossible for individuals who have such inclination to seek state office because they need to satisfy their hidden agenda to corruption, to hide behind the “good old image” of a political party. To be clear, govox-populi is not a party-system at all, it is a commissioning-system that exercises distributional-power with the ability of citizenry-electorates to elect individuals to state office as govoxiers and control their day-to-day administration in government offices – as commissioner-agents for the state. In consequence, citizenry-electorates are required to cast votes for individual representatives to govern as govoxiers, and the character, competency and history of the individuals would form the essential quality that would shape the judgment of the majority votes of citizenry-electorates.

Immediately after the attainment of independence from western colonial rule across Africa, ideas about administrative apparatus of state governance moved toward a single party-system – particularly the idea to recreate ancient African-socialism, to ensure in state affairs the broad-based participation unitary form of multi-ethnic groups within the colonially carved blocks of divided African nations, and to bring about order within the state-centred bureaucratic agencies in policy enactment and implementation. Today, there has been some emphasis, particularly but not only confined to African nations, how a single party-system gradually degenerates into political-autocracy in some and political-ethnocracy in others or both, a hindrance to direct-democracy and economic development, state offices debased into a source of institutionalised corruption of power and public funds, fuelling ethnic tensions and separatist militant groups, and more like.

I say, the primary economic need in Africa since after the attainment of independence; in societies where citizens socio-economic condition depended mainly on subsistence farming pre-independence, where the social structures of communities were stronger than the state structures and institutions, where African republican nationalism-structures remain weak with insufficient economic resource to sustain themselves individually and collectively, where there had been divisions between those who advocates collaborating with the colonial actors post-independence and those who resisted; I say, full collaboration with western colonial actors to provide post-colonial development across Africa, with their intended capitalist development that the Brazzaville and Monrovia group policy that was eventually chosen implies, should have been most preferable mainly to build African infrastructures and governmental agencies to make the state structures stronger than the social structures, as opposed to the handpicking of the governing apparatus of capitalism in the appropriation of the Brazzaville and Monrovia group policy, and rejecting the economic system of capitalism itself.

It is when the state structures become stronger than the social structures, only then could government achieve full control of its society, unitary form of multi-ethnic groups under one nationality, provision of welfare states, and only then could emigration from the republican structure of the state to the ideal African-socialism construct should be expected to succeed.

In settings where African states are still experiencing some level of political instability in some and economic insufficiency in others or both, in the circumstances where most ordinary African citizens cannot afford to purchase goods and services across national boundaries outside of Africa without physically emigrating outside of Africa to work and to earn the substantial foreign currency to do so – because of the fallaciousness of global monetary economy and the inequality of its interest rates that has since kept our African currencies in a permanent state of devaluation, and thus making Africans in Africa unable to afford the same material needs like their western counterparts across national boundaries.

In recognition of the collective aspirations of our African leaders – our fathers and mothers – both within the HomeLand and in the Diasporas, who had jointly fought against colonialism and gained for us the independent African nations within the leadership campaign of the Pan-Africanism movement, with their joint-aspiration to seek a more Afro-centric economic model and to recreate our ancient African-socialism; I say, the proposed ethnopublican nationalism-structure of state provides the unitary form of the divided African nations into one Nation-state with one nationality and it is just right to build a governmental commission-system beneficial to model our ancient African-socialism, and the proposed framework of populocracy provides absolute control of the administration of government by citizenry, the proposed ethno-corporatism provides an avenue to hasten African governmental development from protégism and creates the avenue to achieve our economic self-sufficiency subsistence, and the institution of govox-populi with its accompanying commicracy organisational-mode makes it all the easier to plan and implement governmental and socio-economic development across Africa.

The customary aspect of commicracy in ethnopublican state

The customary aspect of commicracy is an idea brought out of our human experience and thus an embodiment of an existing structural arrangement in human nature that forms the essential feature in human society since the beginning of our human existence itself. To a layperson, the concept of commicracy would mean the shared-interests or aims between two contracting parties and an entrusting power or authority that the citizenry charged their government to carry out a duty or task in the common-interests of their society; to a sociologist, a commicratic organisation does not impose its own rational or personal initiatives to influence the operational outcome of public services or override the established procedures or guidelines as prescribed to its office by its contracting party to administer; to a govoxical scientist, commicracy would come to mean an administration of state government where departmental officials work in overlapping and interdependent circles, with interconnected control systems in place and effective shared delegation and monitoring.

Commicracy has been defined in purpose as a necessity in the interdependency relationship inherent in human nature. While the content of commicracy is not a novel experience in human society, but the direction towards the institutionalise recognition of commicracy as an administrative structural organisational-mode in state government has been what is being given recognition to in this manifesto. In the proposed ethnopublican nationalism-structure of the state, commicracy has been proposed to become the organisation administrative structural mode of the govox-populi institution of government, and indeed the state governing institution that epitomises the economic-internetisation platform of global corporatism operating in our current 21st-century generation.

A commicratic administrative system is tasked by delegation with a role entrusted to a group of people or government or other official body with the authority to deliver the production of policies into a practical condition of public utilities. It is characterised by a formal arrangement relation between two parties or groups in which a group contract and engaged the other group into a commitment to perform certain duties or tasks or to take on certain powers in the shared-interests of both contracting parties. The entrusting authority to act on behalf of another through a shared-interest or attitudes similar to one’s own is a condition of reward-system inherent in human nature and thus the basis of the common-unity that directs the interspersed bonding relationships of our human society.

A commicracy, therefore, is an activity by a group of people officially elected or appointed to perform the authority to undertake specified duties or functions in the interest of the state. It is a grouped coalition organised horizontal, with circles of overlapping and interdependent entities spread across its lines within it – committed and rely on each other on the state of being instructed to carry out specified duties or responsibilities.

Commicracy is a shared distribution of activities between the citizens and their state government in which there is an established commitment to exercise administrative, judicial, or legislative authority and in a manner laid down by the constitution to carry out instructions that execute the decisions of the people. A written legal-Guideline is an important element in commicracy, because it provides the material legal framework for the judicial-arm of government giving such commissioning templates from which to translate and interprets the authorisation of what each party to the constitution are expected to do as at when the situation arises.

The system of commicracy commits officials to be organised, aligned, focus, and driven with commissioning templates that allow them to standardise processes that make creating new pieces of work easy and efficient, in manners that do not compel individual commicrats to impose their personal or rational initiatives to influence the direction of their task or duty to override the established legal-Guidelines or instructive decisions of the people.

The ethnopublican state is a welfare state and relies on the socio-economic performance of its citizenry-society. It is not an ethno-state based on ethnicity, neither is it an ethno-race base on race, nor an ethno-religion based on religion. But rather, it is an ethnopublic based on the qualified right of citizenship to a nation, regardless of racial feature, religious belief or ethnic culture and practice of the individual. The obligation of the state office and the relationship between government and the governed of the citizenry in an ethnopublican society is one of kith and kin.

The ethno-corporatist economic platform of African ethnopublican state would arrange its socio-economic systems of social-welfare to be entirely non-monetary on all the various public utilities that it proposed to institute on the ground in Africa for African people. Institutions such as education, health, housing, and various other state-owned amenities would remain available freely to the citizenry. With the proposed emigration of African states to a unitary form of ethnopublican state, commicracy would expand its spheres of the administrative shared-interest model beyond state offices to operate in citizenry-centred public offices and industrial trades’ relations.

It is a widely known belief that an essential part of an organisation requires its constituent parts to function; without employees, an employer’s trade would remain monocratic and its operational mode would never advance to an organisational-mode and thus remain crippled of its potential advances. But with bureaucracy, the moment employees surrender their labour-service they surrender everything else, including their soul and dignity are snatched along with it. As an organisational-mode, bureaucracy is a complete failure, and the two things labour-providers should avoid in our current global corporatist society are an organisation of promotion – organisations that placed ‘promotion’ as a reward for labour-service, and organisation of complexity – complex hierarchical structure with multiple layers and procedures that recourse decision-making process slow and that restricts workers to inefficiency and prone to engage in corrupt practices to complete tasks.

I say anyone with the capacity to engage in a work activity to earn a living, it matters not if you are a trainee or would require guidance on the job, commicracy would not subject you to the condition of being employed to work as a chattel property, and it would not place your employer in a hierarchy of position above you and ranked you as subordinate – just as every constituent of machinery are part of their whole, so as your labour-service is part of the organisation in which you work – so you are your entity, your department, and no individual can or should subordinate your labour-service below any other – every labour-service is as well an equal partner to any other labour-service in an ethno-corporatist society. Manager and secretary are as equal, just as a cleaner of a company is in equal labour-service to the job as the position of the CEO.

The self-evident common-interest between employers and employees in commicratic administrative functions; is what sets the concept of commicracy apart from bureaucracy, including the hierarchical vertical management of bureaucratic structure in direct opposition to the horizontal management of commicratic structure; both of which define the sole inputs and outputs of their respective organisational production and operate on a contradistinction administrative structural mode of organisation, as shown on the next page in a table of compare and contrast between bureaucracy and commicracy:

BUREAUCRACY	COMMICRACY
Vertical-management structures that are hierarchical with levels of graded authority where the lower offices are supervised by the higher ones, with strict adherence to rules that subject those at the lower offices to stringent control while performing their official duty.	Horizontal-management structures that are commissioned with levels of interdependent authority where there are no lower or higher offices and supervision are carried out by a separate secretarial departmental office within the organisation, with strict adherence to guidelines under shared-power or equal allocation of authority.
Bureaucratic Administrative Structure implies that set-methods are more important than efficiency.	Commicratic Administrative Structure is the proposition that efficiency is more important than the proficiency of set-methods.
It is set up with clear chains of command so that everyone has a boss. Power of decision making flows from the top of the hierarchy downward.	It is set up with clear commissioning model-templates as a guide so that everyone knows what their role is and what they are expected to do. It also makes it easier to work remotely, and the power of decision flows interdependently between those affected by the decision.
Governs organisations through closed-systems – formal, protectionist and rigid to maintain order.	Governs organisations through open-systems – self-organised, accountable and interdependent to maintain order.
The natural environment of bureaucracy is a driven catalyst that pressure bureaucrats to making implicit assumptions to influence their organisational output.	The natural environment of commicracy is a driven catalyst that obliged commicrats to rely on explicit expressions by the primary meaning of their terms of service, leaving nothing to implications.
Bureaucratic procedures are metathesiophobic; and compelled bureaucrats to rely heavily on procedures that worked well in the past, creating conflicts with experimentation and innovations.	Commicratic procedures are neophiliac; and compelled commicrats to, by routine, crave anything new and progressive, encouraging experimentation and innovations.
It imposes hierarchical procedures and defined them as the spheres of competence and division of labour.	It employs subcontract procedures and defined them as the spheres of productive and mutually beneficial arrangement.
Bureaucrats implement government policies by taking the laws and decisions made by elected officials in the state office and put them into practice. Some bureaucrats even write rules and regulations as well.	Commicrats implement government policies by taking the guidelines and decisions made by citizenry-electorates and put them into practice. No commicrats write rules and regulations for the state.
It demands productivity of employees by promising promotion and higher salary with time, whereas it is practically impossible to promote everyone leading to discontentment and broken promises in the workplace and employees organised search to find a new role. And even for those that it promotes means an equal number has to be made redundant, leading to an illusive process like a vicious circle in that broken-promises that creates a loss for all employees at the end.	It motivates productivity in employees by encouraging proactive change to honing their skills and to be good at what they do best since each role is distinct and requires specific skills and everyone is treated as team-member who have joined because each is part of a larger project involved in the same work activity. And each team member is a subcontractor with a specific role and required skills contribution, creating a sense of certainty around job security.
At the top of a bureaucratic organisation is a manager who oversees the entire bureaucracy.	Within the commicratic organisation is an administrator who supervises the entire commicracy.
Managers direct workers on how they should handle tasks and situations, from a single line of command and control.	Workers are interdependent on how they handle tasks and situations, and each issue order to direct actions of others to complete own tasks.
Depends on following the same procedures and predictability so that the organisation will produce similar results in a similar circumstance.	Depends on following prescribed procedures and adapt to changes in their commissioning templates so that the organisation will produce prescriptive results in all circumstances.
Complete control is in the hands of a few officials and their power of decision-making jeopardises the interests of ordinary citizens. In consequence, ‘rule by officials’ is the characteristic of bureaucracy.	Complete control is in the hands of the citizenry-electorates and their power of decision-making safeguard the interests of service-users collectively. In consequence, ‘rule together’ by both officials and their service-users is the characteristic of commicracy.
Bureaucracy as an organisational structure was a fascist’s programme that kept the state above the society. Hence the emphasis was upon the group discharging guidelines to dictate bureaucratic functions with no mechanism in place to exercising regulations on the existing functions themselves.+	Commicracy as an organisational structure is a humanitarian programme that kept the society in shared-control with the state. Hence the emphasis is upon the group exercising regulations on the existing functions rather than discharging their own prescribed guidelines to dictate commicratic functions.
The multilayered hierarchical management of bureaucracies is a necessary condition for exercising managerial discretion, forecasting, planning and simple codified tasks, in which capitalist business industries historically developed.	The levelled parallel management of commicracies is a necessary condition for exercising self-management, innovation, experimentation and highly codified tasks, in which corporatist online business industries are developing.
A bureaucratic system relies on the possession of power through its exercise of managerial rules, with a single line of command and control.	A commicratic system relies on the organisational shared interests of a group of people, through its compliance with managerial guidelines, with joint control to execute and complete tasks.
Bureaucratic organisations can only thrive in a stable and predictable environment with rigid or static rules that inhibit adaptation.	Commicratic organisation is built to thrive in a fast-paced environment with compliance to guidelines that encourage adaptation.
Bureaucracies motivate employees and workers using economic-incentives, such as awarding employees with bonuses, coupons, sales discounts, freebies, free holidays, and the likes. But individuals are so preoccupied with work with no time to pursue personal goals, interests or hobbies.	Commicracies transforms employees into subcontractors and motivates employees and workers by utilising social life-incentives, such as creating the ideal work/life balance that suits the individual purpose, so individuals can have the time to pursue their personal goals, interests or hobbies.
Bureaucracy requires human-centric decision-making to function, which allows tasks to be coordinated on much longer timescales and mostly conflicts with a wider set of participants beyond the organisation.	Commicracy employs more of humans’ efficiency and apply algorithm to function, which allows tasks to be coordinated on much shorter timescales and can be stretched across a much wider set of participants beyond the organisation.

Both bureaucracy and commicracy are essentially a way of administratively organising large numbers of people who need to work together in compatible ways; both are mode of organisation with equal capacity to achieve complete domination of administrative functions; both can execute tasks into smaller tasks so that different people work on different parts of the task that they are competent or expert in; both employ individuals according to merits, access to knowledge and expertise; and both are administrative structural mode of organisation.

Everywhere we looked, we see the type of personality traits that are required in a bureaucratic organisation make an emphasis to desire people with certain natural tendencies or state of mind that predispose the individual to exert authority to a certain state of affair if given such responsibility. People take up jobs and they are given work training design to transform their behavioural personality in ways that make them appear to gain such confidence, to believe that being in a position of bureaucratic-power will improve their work-life and personal life also; that to thrive on higher rank and status-conscious in society would guarantee to them the respect and social status we should feel our individual-selves deserve, and ignoring the reality that the influence of bureaucratic-power meant different things to different people and thus becomes the norms to which our university graduates year-on-year are daily being persuaded to have their ego boosted to such a state of affair to glory in being the new generation of corporate psychopaths.

They dragged us to the classrooms and indoctrinates us to develop a conscious attitude towards money and bureaucratic-power; they say extreme competition for money in human society plays a major role in our successes, and that we should be routinely be persuaded on the path of bureaucracy, to be influenced by its charismatic-authority and to develop in us such personality traits to desire to exercise dominion and control over others whilst in jobs regardless of the situation; encouraging us to desire career choices where a desire for bureaucratic-power is considered as a virtue – a self-serving attitude towards power and money. In consequence, we see our generation with the tendencies to looking down at one another, and with the psychopathic desire to exercise bossiness over others; we see people with certain natural personality traits with such inclination to work in certain industries, such as police, prison, immigration and institutions where there is a significant high-level regime of bureaucracy and to issue commands to their co-workers and service-users is the daily routine of the job.

We are daily being indoctrinated by bureaucracy; our human society has become obsessed with its nature of power; it influences our human nature to moral corruption and against what is altruism; it characterised the political life of politicians and took advantage of the desire of human nature to be influenced to take the paths to desire social-status that automatically commands the respect of reverence in our course of life; its capitalist work-ethics tells us to pursue power and to wield it for our individualistic advantage; I say, bureaucratic-power corrupts absolutely!

Nay, our human behaviour would no longer be moulded in the spirit of bureaucracy. I predict that bureaucracy everywhere in human society would stifle, and commicracy should eventually emerge as the dominant feature the world over. Virtually, every public or private organisation should appropriate commicratic structures and to be spread more spontaneously in such as way that bureaucratic structures would no longer be viable of a productive organisational operation.

Often, the diffused-power that commicracy would exercise to displace bureaucracy would produce organisational behaviour in the workplace that would appear as resulting from common-interests between employers and employees; where there would be no qualitative definition between superior-subordinate relationships or the condition of being identified as belonging to a higher rank or lower rank position within a commicratic organisation – that condition that indoctrinates people to be urge to go psychopathic on their fellow humans.

The customary aspect of commicracy in an ethnopublican state would be one of task, duty or function that a person or a group accept as its office commitment to perform as instructed by its contracting person or group without variation. Often, this term would be used in a complementary sense and should denote conscious willingness to be productive and offer one service in an altruistic manner with no variation, judgment or bias opinion or belief.

To us, modern corporatists, who live in the 21st century, all eras that had existed in human society before our own may have been suitable for the bureaucratic model of organisation, except our own. With the emergence of the Information-Age that began in the mid-20th century, the emergence of the digital world that sprung from it began to interlinking globally the informed-knowledge about anything and everything that is making information widely available to anyone who seeks it from anywhere in the world through computer technology.

The information tech-Industry where Google belongs has laid the foundation for a rapid epochal shift from the bureaucratic administrative functions established by old immobilised industrial operations to the commicratic administrative functions that mobilised industrial operations, made possible by our extreme socio-culture of web-internetisation networking, and has made a realistic prospect to a new era of what I identified as the global Revelation-Age dictating within it the material condition of a global restoration-era into corporatist economic life of the world society collectively.

Besides, it is the existence of bureaucracy that ever becomes old-fashioned with the rampant abuse of official influence in the affairs of government; red-tape to make a simple task seems complicated and to make the possible produce impossible outcome – the term ‘corruption’ became so institutionalised that we hardly know the difference between it and what ‘bureaucracy’ meant to us in our 21st-century generation. How many employee service-provider anywhere would vote for bureaucracy above commicracy?

The simple answer is that bureaucracy is out of date and had long expired in human society. In the current revelation-age, the only information that is not available to our individual selves is things that do not concern us; and the only information that is available to us is things that concern us. The revelation-age is advancing society faster than we know it, and the first stage of a hybrid form of a classless-society is soon with us – but not in our generation though. Whether we live under a state of absolute monarchy or a republican state, the revelation-age is advancing society the world over into a state of being governed to a considerable extent by a commicracy administrative function.

The Social and Economic Characteristics of Commicracy

The social and economic characteristics of commicracy are, without a doubt, the major factors that would influence motivation for economic growth in an ethno-corporatist society. However, the growth performance depends not only on what policy measures the citizenry-electorates submits to the government to be implemented but also on how these policies are actually implemented executively by the secretariat-branch of government – and therefore, is influenced by the character of the commicracy.

In my analysis of the dynamics of commicracy in terms of its social and economic organisation, especially on the choices made through citizenry-electorates’ decision-making processes and the interpersonal relationships inside the govox-populi commicratic organisations, informs me to first propose my analysis of the productive dimension of commicracy. Here, I briefed the theory of ‘provision’ by commicrats, based on the idea of how citizenry-electorates would purpose to exercise their ‘demand’ for state provisions. The proposed commicracy in Africa is the inevitable correlation of coalitionism: of the proposed activity of the state to make provisions for state-owned industries, and of its monopsony economic condition in which citizenry are the only consumers. Commicracy is suitable as a transforming process of socio-economic activities from monetary to non-monetary ones.

Commicratic management differs from bureaucratic money-motivated management that can manipulate guidelines to change rules and impose qualitative factors of evaluation to determine the prices of goods and services – the price system. Commicracy, in this context, means the constitution of a moneyless form of resource accounting in the predominance of citizenry-centred decisions to prescribe guidelines that administer control over the provision-system.

The economic characteristics of commicracy are a specific management structure for the allocation of resources, a system that performs economic activities on the condition of a moneyless form of resource accounting and provisions of goods and services. In the current order, the allocation of resources is made through a bureaucratic profit-motivating money management system.

But here, the system of money or its profit-making culture has no place in the commicratic machinery. Indeed, the administration of commicracy in its allocation of resources gives predominance to conformity to guidelines – the basic requirement of all citizenry and the government to play their parts in a commicratic society – the working-age to engage in work activity and the government to regulate the allocation of production and resources according to the citizenry prescribed guidelines that determine the provisioning of use-values to whom and how and the what form of entitlement is provisioned.

The citizenry prescribed guidelines control the regulatory mechanism of government to determine production and provisions to the different social-groups in society, to whom it applies and in what capacity, its enforcement and regulation, and the method to which each social-group can access their economical use-values at any one time.

Since ethno-corporatism promotes the existence of both public-sector and citizenry-sector establishments in its society, by transforming the role of the competitive trading associated with private-sector used to develop the capitalist economy to its citizenry-sector services, the power to prescribe guidelines and regulations we placed in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates and their working-group would replace the engine of economic growth associated with private-sector to operate the activity of the citizenry-sector.

The role of the private sector in a capitalist society which is owned by private groups as a money-making and profit-seeking enterprise would be replaced with the proposed role of citizenry-sector where the working-group belong as a means to increase productivity of industries for the provisioning of use-values to consumers in an ethno-corporatist society. As a result, the essential trait of commicratic management of the economy in Africa would be the interdependent relationships of both the public-sector controlled by the secretariat-branch of government and the citizenry-sector controlled by the citizens and residents alike.

The public-sector primary responsibility is to make provisions for state-owned infrastructures and extraction of raw materials and employs its workforce from the economy-division responsible for staffing workers including the govoxiers and their staffs working for the government, while activities in the citizenry-sector are restricted to manufacturing and service industries, all of which are guided by the motive for the working-group to meet their economical use-values.

The public-sector includes all those government services, ministries and commissions, regulated by the secretariat-branch of government, and the citizenry-sector includes the manufacturing and service, economic industries and trades, that are privately owned and controlled by individual citizens or community-interests groups or other non-governmental organisations. While the public-sector services include provisions such as health-care, education, and all services required to facilitate economic services to citizenry-society, and the working-group that occupy the citizenry-sector also have the equal capacity to create private health-care services and private education services and any other economic services within the resource capacity of the economy-branch of government for the use-values of citizenry-society or to cater for a section of society as their establishments mission so desire.

The public-sector exists in fact to motivate the citizenry-sector to drive competitions for a better quality of goods and services, economic development and growth, more choices and variety of products, more innovations, greater efficiency and productivity, and stronger populocratic management of public affairs by promoting individual initiatives, freedom to trade and compete, and equality-delivery of economic power to all. The public-sector only get involve in establishing an industry or trade and operates it as state-owned in a particular region if it appears any of the above qualities are lacking within an industry under the citizenry-sector. And everywhere that competition has been broadly established as the best tools for promoting consumer satisfaction, the public-sector establishment may decide to pull back and withdraw state-owned establishments within such particular industry in the region as the means to create more avenues for citizens owned private establishments to flourish and prosper in their endeavours.

The power relationship between the public-sector and citizenry-sector is diffused-power they can exercise over one another. A citizen-owned private establishment can go out of operation not because the government-sanctioned it or held it accountable for producing poor quality service or product, but because it cannot compete with the state-owned establishment operating the same trade within the same region. Often it is the state-owned establishments that will be forced to go out of operations in regions where there are many citizens owned private establishments producing the same type of products or services in a variety of ways that will eventually overwhelm the state-owned establishment to cannot compete.

The non-monetary economy of ethno-corporatism that placed state-centred decisions in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates allows citizens owned private establishments to compete in equal terms because everyone has access to the same material resources for production and labour-power in equal proportion as state-owned establishments. The combination of the variety of products that drive more consumers to their brands and the quality of services each establishment can offer will determine the winners and losers in an ethno-corporatist’s competitive economy.

Sometimes, usually involving citizens owned private establishments or community-interests groups that can pick their locations based on their perception of the social needs in a particular region, secretariat regulations might see their activities as uneven practices within a region that favour a section of the community above another and take competitive action to enforce balance.

For example, a Muslim community in one region may desire their local stores to be more halal-store friendly, and while there might have been very strong citizenry prescribed guidelines operating in that region supporting such changes, even though there are enough stores in operation competing but with few that are halal-friendly. Secretariat can erect state-owned stores that choose to apply high standards for operating halal-store friendly or put in place additional measures that is legally required with consumers to meet the desire of the Muslim community in that region.

However, there can be a negative effect from either the public-sector or citizenry-sector or both. This is where community-interest groups or citizens owned private establishment can exercise their economic power to create such trading or operate establishments that cater to the needs of their desired group within a community. It would remain mandatory for trade establishments to have it known on their store-front whether they are community-interest, state-owned or privately-owned, for easy identification of what their main priorities are, so this can cause a variety of product types and creates more choices for consumers within regions across Africa. It would be the norm to see a state-owned establishment seek to cater for everyone by establishing different sections within its store to meet the needs of everyone within its located regions.

In an ethnopublican state, citizenry shared-control of state government administration of the social and economic management of society would take many forms, and the state apparatus requires the administrative structural mode of organisation to implement policies – a commicracy. The predominance of the global economic-internetisation platform of our emerging corporatist society the world over has dictated the administrative functions of commicracy in our current 21st-century socio-culture.  The shared-control of state governance between citizenry-electorates and govoxiers in the management of the economy would take many forms: decision-making of citizenry-electorates to implement prohibitions, obligations, restrictions of production, guidelines to force negflation, and monopsony of many producers of product types on the ground in Africa in which African citizenry-society and residents alike are the only consumer.

Indeed, as I would further expatiate in this manifesto, each of the citizenry shared-control of state government management of the economy requires the establishment of citizenry-centred commissions; in-charge of enforcing citizenry-electorates prescribed guidelines and service provisions; that operates on a system of codified commicracy; and that creates a uniform source that is easy to access for both govoxiers and the ordinary citizens. The office of the citizenry-centred commissions would operate only on commicratic system and their staffs would be called commicrats – because of their thorough analysis, research and investigation that commits the office of the secretariats governmental departments to be proactive, proficient and establishing inspections and follow-up systems that ensure efficiency in economic production and public services that the commissions administer as its secretariat service-delivery regional establishment.

The struggling economy in African societies in terms of the inability of African states to compete as equal economic partners with other countries outside Africa is currently been vitally made achievable by bureaucracy. Although it has been propagated throughout academic thesis and research that African states have insufficient work-heads across their public bureaucracies, and that has been linked to underdeveloped growth in African economies collectively.

While I wholly agree that having sufficient work-heads in state offices to keeping robust records of changes in the economy of a state as very important to planning its economic growth to economic sufficiency, but the hierarchical structure of bureaucracy meant that those that holds positions at higher offices dictates the work of those positioned as their subordinates in lower offices; and in capitalist-centred economies where accumulation of personal wealth through acquisition of money is promoted as virtuous and to be the norm and common-unity of socio-economic relations, and bureaucracies in such societies where power to make state centred-decisions is placed in the control and directions by a small group of government officials in the conceal of a ruling political-party or one-party state, it therefore calls upon our common-sense to deduce that corruption would be the order of the day-to-day administration across government within such organisation in societies anywhere.

The unfortunate consequence of the administrative regime of bureaucracy is made worse across African states because of the insufficiencies of economic resource post-independence era. When we hear of such accusation of bribery and money laundering crisscrossing across national boundaries to benefits foreign corporations and their investors, and African citizens constantly finding themselves as victims of corrupt behavioural practices by government bureaucrats, embezzlement of public funds, outright institutionalised theft, abuse of power and blatant stealing from the proceeds from the trade of natural resources across governments; none of these bureaucratic inefficiencies we can boldly confine to African states, but exist universally in various forms in countries across the world, globally – developing world and the so-called developed ones as well. I say, the administration of bureaucracy is a breeding source for corruption!

Here, I propose an economic theory of commicracy, arguing that commicracy functions by proscribing against the customary operation of bureaucratic incentives within the organisation. Bureaucratic bribery, as I choose to identify it, targets the many things employees would like to get or desires, such as social-class-incentives with its culture of never-ending promises of promotions to employees; economic-incentives of bonus besides salary and its never-ending promises to increasing the salary of employees, including the honorary-incentives of presenting employees with certificates of achievements and the whatnots.

The culture of bureaucratic bribery in an organisation starts by offering employees to submit lists of what kinds of incentives they would most like to receive for their service-performance in the workplace. Bureaucratic bribery exists in various forms and it also awards economic incentives to employees as coupons, sales discounts, freebies, free holidays, and the likes. This is an important avenue in which bureaucratic culture is being exercised to exercise power over employees in the workplace and buy their loyalties to commits to a certain state of affairs creating the breeding source for unhealthy relations and greed in our human society the world over – to spurs an employee to do more of whatever was encouraged by the managers through the direct or indirect chosen incentives.

In the current order, we see how organisations commit religiously to prove the point that they only exist to make money and to continue to maximise their profits over the service-quality provision to their service-users, and bureaucratic motivation exploits the use of economic-incentives to compel employees to work hard towards striving for the best possible monetary outcomes for the organisation. And, everywhere we looked, we see everything an organisation does, and the way they work, benefits the organisation while their service-users suffer the financial liabilities of those successes. In bizarre cases we see communities and societies suffer through a lack of knowledge of the consequences of certain industries and their chemical outputs positioned in their neighbourhood, and the economic-incentives to bureaucrats in government offices to deliberately failed to establish such industries away from human habitation areas.

The framework of commicracy redefines the whole concept of incentives within the organisation. Commicracy is emerging as an organisational structural mode creating the ideal work/life balance that suits individual purpose and condition of life, independence to set your hours and fit your work around other commitments, creative-freedom to explore several creative solutions to complete tasks and meet targets, flexible remote working options through internet networking and the more prevalent desire to working from home that invariably resolved the bureaucratic office politics and its undignified form of hierarchies including the time-consuming and expensive and stressful daily commute to work and back home. I identity ten essential characteristics of commicracy that set it apart from bureaucracy:

1. Interdependent working relation is most efficient in the current digital world of fusionistic operations of dealing with service-users and clients online, and the collaborative work across boundaries with other interdependent workers and group that empowers one another to be capable of creative appetite to networking with other individuals or experts in the field and can be stretched across a much wider set of participants within and beyond the organisations.
2. Parallel levelled management structure with shared lines of authority. I call this the Horizontal Management Framework needed to emigrate from the bureaucratic hierarchical management structure. This would allow workers to grow increasingly capable of their executive engagements in the fast-paced global corporatist web-internetisation environment; because it demands quick-thinking that implies promptness in finding answers in response to or in devising measures to temporary solutions in moments of urgency or challenge.
3. Interdependent culture based on conformity to execute instructions in adherence to the specificity of the charge of the decision-making of your service-users to meet their needs. Interdependent culture would allow workers the opportunity to collaborate on a range of tasks and projects with multiple clients and develop the govoxical learning skills – admitting to being human when you don’t have all the answers to questions, revealing mistakes according to one’s knowledge and understanding, sharing confusion and uncomfortable feelings and emotions with service-users which is essential in getting through to them in meeting their needs.
4. Knowledge and self-belief are valuable tools because they provide the responsibility for engagement with each task. Understanding your job role is essential, while the willingness to adapt to service-users’ ever-changing and diverse needs is linked with having the temperament to be a good listener to gain the dependent culture mentioned above.  
5. Departmental supervisors appointed to oversee the organisation of interdependent workers. This allows workers to learn the commicratic culture of technical systems of subcontracting procedures and its processes of working together with other interdependent bodies.
6. Depends on following prescribed procedures and adapt to changes in their commissioning model-templates so that the organisation will produce prescriptive results in all circumstances. This allows workers to be self-organised, to be individually accountable for each success or its failure thereof, and the interdependency of shared authority in maintaining order.
7. A developed independent organisation skill by taking control of every aspect of your task is important. By creating a to-do-list, workers would be better placed to envisage where they need to be at certain times and what they are expected to do as at when, and leave a space in their diary to attend to briefing-in new incoming tasks.
8. Commicratic mode of organisation would fuse workers’ social life into its culture of interdependent work approach – the culture to work independently with little expectation to be told what to do and how to do your task from day one. Advances in computer software have been made capable to provide the template for any work-model in the work-place, and all that is required is to learn the pattern and you are as competent as the next worker in the same field. All the training you would require to do your job would be provided in form of a commissioning model-template that provides the guidelines of what is expected to complete tasks during the induction process by the organisation departmental supervisor, and help would only be provided by the supervisor if you asked for it. And after that, you’re your boss and your manager, and free to set your time as you so desire within the organisation set-time limit, and free to set your work/life balance and make your own work-style rules that suit your healthy-individualism as long as your set-rules comply within the organisation existing guidelines. In a bureaucratic mode of organisation, workers are mastered into being constantly charged upon by managers in higher ranks in the hierarchy, and almost intimidating and distressing to the point of sapping workers of their dignity. But in commicracy, there is no such thing as hierarchy and the confidence to work a subcontracting way is what is required to achieve your healthy-individualism that will add value to your well-being, your attitude to work and approach to your service-users you get to interact with daily if your role requires it.
9. The rapid advances within computer internetisation platform have meant that workers now operate in a fast-paced work environment with the constant streams of demanding work notifications and other plans in both our private and public lives can overwhelm the senses – stressing mind and thoughts. In my vocational research into the human brain on the subject of Psychextrics; here, we observed our human capacity to adapt to a fast-paced environment to wholly genetics and influenced by environmental condition one is placed at any one time. The fast-paced environment merely acts as the catalyst to invoke the machinery of the genes-neurotype to keep activating its herds from each genes-code, and whatever is activated from its hereditary-repository depending on the specific nature of the fast-paced environment determines whether the individual continues to adapt or preserved at a condition or state of affairs. The fascinating thing about genes-neurotype is how they present to always be in a state of developing – always activating into a new version from its last stage of behavioural being – never stagnate or inactive and activated genes herds die off after replicating its activated genes herds. The good news is that the proposed ethno-corporatist society for Africa comes with it the fusionistic fast-paced performance that drives its digital ecosystem, just like its consortium global corporatist-society – both of which completely redefined the concept of time. And the free access to a mobile device, with its text messages and email apparatus, allows workers in commicratic organisations to set and allocate their time to suits their work/life balance and engage in desk-work activities within the pace that suits one genetic constitution and condition of life.
10. Unlike bureaucracy built on class-system operation, commicracy is built on equality-delivery-system. Whilst it remains out of foresight, owing to the current order of things, to envisage the possibility to overhaul and eradicate class-system anywhere, but the level of advances emerging from the computer technology sector in our current generation has indeed made it a reality to believe we could mitigate the effects of economic-class system with altruism everywhere in human society. The existence of Nature over the universe is built on an interdependent commission system, even our human biological and genetic composition is built on such interdependent system, but then it became inherent in human nature to be influenced to build societal affairs to operate based on classification-system, but I say that the affinity between two interconnected parts and relations between humans cannot be ignored. Humans are an interdependent being, just in the same way we rely on commissioning relationship with one another to achieve social consensus and ordered society.

In a commicratic society, the affairs of a society would be built on equal-opportunities and not class-system. The level of hyper-connection that our modern technological advancement brought with it is for everyone and it is an enduring joy to know that majority of our human population are estimated to have the corposense capability to drive the technological and cultural alterations we are experiencing in our current 21st-century generation that is mitigating the inherent nature of class-society that we have been indoctrinated by for our human existence from the past generation. The more people crave the stimulating events of computer-intelligence and inviting them to their psyches, the stronger the populocratic expressions of human society collectively becomes the driving force that is substituting the socio-economic class-system to developing into equal opportunities for all – towards an egalitarian society everywhere and anywhere the world over.

Commicracy has resulted from the failure of bureaucracy that caused the widespread lack of flexibility and the complicated set of rules within the organisation, gross inefficiencies in allocating resources, and a catalyst for corruption for placing individual workers creative solutions to be decided by managers. Commicratic parallel levelled management enabled self-organised planning at all levels of the organisation; allow subcontracting roles to define their tasks’ time-factor and execute their roles efficiently; and the interdependent networking within the organisation allows resources to be easily integrated with flexible rules of individuals in compliance with existing guidelines that allow for easy learning, adaptiveness and innovation in pursuit of economies of scale.

Bureaucracy is, to have the pleasure of paraphrasing myself, the administrative mode of capitalism that had brought into play economic-rationalism, whereas commicracy which I identified as the administrative model of corporatism avails us to the practice of economic-equalism. With computer-technology, as I have mentioned in volume:1 of this manifesto; that, it is no longer a requirement of our work–ethics in the 21st century for every individual free use of web-internetisation to network for any purpose to rationally and manually carry out its algorithmic activity that powered-on computer hardware to serve one’s purpose. I say that the integral part of human’s rationality, which has already expertly draw breathes inside every computerised device, has made it possible for economic-equalism to operates with ease under the administrative structure of commicracy that is proposed to operate successfully in the proposed ethno-corporatist society for Africa. I maintain that the power of human rational-logical thinking that is materialising through the platforms of various software programmes, is homogeneous with the power of computer artificial-intelligence’ rationality. I claim that the global corporatist economy that have torn away from the world economy the rationalism of individualistic capitalist class operation in the workplace, and imposing the collective-individualism of altruistic-relations on the world socio-economic operations, have, as a matter of course, also caused some major structural changes in the social and economic environment globally that is disrupting the dynamic of bureaucracy in various organisations, thus nudging us towards reinventing the administrative structure of our organisational-mode in the workplace, in our day-to-day interactions and in our social life, and even family dynamic with highest levels of empathy within households, to taking on certain specific characteristics in the name of equality and mitigating the old-power of class-system operations within organisations in human society.

This uncertainty, I say gladly, very much so, is threatening the very position of bureaucracy in our modern 21st-century generation, and is oozing great happiness in the hearts and souls of us modern corporatists. Despite the model’s popularity of commicratic contents everywhere, bringing joy and hope of positive change to come in human society, politicians are obstinately determined to push the ethical directives of bureaucracy centre stage and dominating their organisational operations with its nature and functions of inequality and power-class operations, and of the emphasis of higher ranks and subordination of fellow being for determining the notion of hierarchical management structure with clear chains of command and roles of authority so that everyone has a boss, and their static old-fashioned way to rely heavily on procedures that worked well in the past, creating conflicts with experimentation and innovations within governmental organisation operation. Whereas, we have realised it now, and it is not in doubt, that all the bureaucratic exhaustively guided organisational management rules are stifling the novel concepts of the commicratic model emerging from web-internetisation operations socially and economically of their authenticity.

I say, the installation of commicracy in Africa would seek to bring to an end the bureaucratic corruption that is plighting us across the HomeLand. The citizenry-electorates would gain the state-power to openly and publicly tasking the regulatory authorities on any suspicion of corrupt activities and conflicts of interest in government or with government officials’ connected bodies, and to demote such individuals from state-office. The strong govoxical-will of citizenry-electorates across the diverse states in Africa would resolve all national and foreign corrupt practices that seek to operate within their regions.

It is when citizenry-electorates took charge of the affairs of government, to set the guidelines that control the day-to-day administration of government including all the social systems of social control in their society, to flushing out the last vestige of the direct and the indirect bureaucratic parastatals and their problematic intermediaries from within every region across Africa, even up to the very high core of government, to spread and increase the citizenry commicratic reform projects uniformly across African states, the ongoing risks that are preventing those legitimate foreign business corporations willing to doing business in Africa for the economic advancement of African society would resolve itself for our common-good as a matter of course.

Commicracy would produce robust control around government, provisions mandating certain measures to prevent corrupt practices as they are identified, the engagement and monitoring reporting obligations, accountability of anyone in government office, measures such as these would be the core components of populocracy.

CHAPTER FOUR

GOVOX-POPULI AS A SCIENCE

Govox-populi is a profession. While one must earn the majority electoral vote to become a govoxier, but education is a necessary precondition to assume a role within a govox-populi organisation.

When I say education, I did not mean govox-populi as a subject-matter that takes years to be studied at an educational institution as a social-science study. Rather, for example, the positions of StateLords, Lord-Governors and Lord-Councillors would require a study in law and have a law educational qualification is essential for the job as StateLords; the govoxical positions within the secretariat, economists and citizenry-branch of government would require educational study or vocational training that placed one in the direct profession under any of the secretariats’ ministries. Also, the positions of commicrats and citizenry-committees should have the grace of educational study in philosophy and to be proficient with the science of people’s management. Govox-populi then becomes the core of an educated person.

Professionalising govox-populi requires that govoxical skills have to be honed like any other social science studies. And it will be proposed as a recommended additional requirement to be had besides a primary educational qualification that would be the requirement essential to be a govoxier, which is a Graduate Certificate Level-8 course of study and allow one to gain a specialised qualification in govox-populi, besides an existing qualification from any other field of study; and a graduate certificate in govox-populi is more specialised qualification than a Bachelor’s degree.

The educational subject-matter of govox-populi takes around six-months of full-time study to complete, like any other Graduate certification subject, because the major requirements needed to qualify one as a govoxier requires the primary inputs from any of the other academic disciplines. As a result, govox-populi as a social science study cannot be taken independently of any other academic subjects, and therefore it is a specialised course to prepare graduates to be able to take up a professional career as interdependent government official, besides any other academic subjects they may have – because it allows one to develop their knowledge, skills and understanding of govox-populi.

However, with those who are already working in government but have no Bachelor degree certification, govox-populi would be offered as an apprenticeship study at a level higher than that of their existing educational qualification or lack thereof – as a transitioning necessity to them because they are already working in government before govox-populi was imposed as a requirement via the apprenticeship route.

The argument is that the graduate certification in govox-populi teaches people the knowledge and skills to perform in a specialised role not existed before in academic study or work-place environment. The apprenticeship structured training is therefore needed to integrate those who are already working in political government into a govoxical government structure.

The question is asked: what is govox-populi? To turn the other side of the coin and contrast with the German economist and sociologist Max Weber, in his essay titled: ‘Politics as a Vocation’ (1919); I say, the concept of govox-populi is extremely broad and comprises any kind of interdependent commissioning of leadership in action. Govox-populi is everywhere, and it is inherent in human nature.

The word Govox-Populi, which literally means ‘government voice of people’, exists in the action of at least one person exercising collaborative control of equal decision-making power with at least another person over a thing. When at least 2 people exercised equal power of control over something, they’ve gained authority to act, govern and rule together over the thing – which may appear at first glance to overlap with the definition of commicracy.

But here, while commicracy merely requires one person to authorise another to act together over something – the collaborative act to subcontract the service of another and for both to rule together over a thing – which allows unequal skill within the group or one with higher decision-making power over another, but govox-populi requires the joint-action of at least two people to acquire for themselves equal power or peer capacity to govern over a thing. One speaks of the doctrine of common-purpose, another may speak of the act of common-design, and my fellow learned-friends in law may speak of the law of joint-enterprise. I say that the requirement of social action is the behaviour of interdependency, and the act of mutual interdependent relationship in the affairs of a society between the government and the governed is the governing authoritative voice or action of the populous – the governing voice of people – govox-populi. So, I replaced the question with a new one: what are the professional ethics and standards of state governmental govox-populi?

I say, the ethics of govox-populi are standards that the ethnopublican structure of the state sets for the administration of state government. It defines what acceptable conducts in state government is, and prescribed how govoxiers should address issues and matters of state affairs. It also exemplifies the characters and traits of an exemplary govoxier. To put it simply, the ethics of govox-populi involve the ability to shape the opinions of others and help them form ideas to resolve social issues.

Unlike politicians, govoxiers do not make public policy and they are encouraged not to make moral judgments about others’ actions or motives. In fact, govoxiers are encouraged to ask questions that help their regional citizenry-electorates work together and make sense of their situations; to learn to reason amongst themselves, to learn to conjure, invent ideas, and arrive at a decision to solve issues of concern within their region that affects them all.

Govox-populi and ethics belong to the same realms of life – persuasive-power. Ethics of rhetoric is what we do as humans when we inform others about a situation, to persuade or motivate them in specific situations, to annex our internal ability to treat others with respect, to understand them, caring for their needs, and engage in fair discourse with questions that allow them to understand themselves and arrive at the phases of both our ethical-persuasions.

Govoxical discourse is what govoxiers do when they base information around the nature of things and their general attributes; when they attempt to explore the other person’s viewpoint on issues that concern them all; when they offer personal concerns using associative ideas and principles; and when they reiterate the viewpoint of others to create scenarios of questions that allow participants to create resolutions within themselves. This placed ethics of human nature and govox-populi as one and the same.

Govoxiers must be a good listener to ensure meaningful rapport with the ethics of a society’s moral fabric. Govoxiers must show purposeful leadership to avoid reflecting the values or moral-ethics of one group in society over another, and not to show favouritism between parties; they also must be able to create a connection with their audience and only acts with the consent of the governed. Govoxiers must show effective interdependent-leadership by acknowledging credibility that the decision-making power comes from the people. Govoxiers must offer satisfaction to the people by knowing when to concede, when to advance discourse and when to back away.

Politics	Govox-Populi
Politics is any kind of independent leadership in action.	Govox-populi is any kind of interdependent leadership in action.
Politicians are more focused on influencing the people in maintaining the image of their political party and the prestige of their individual selves in public office.	Govoxiers are conscious of the needs of the people and more focused on persuading the people to help them shape policies or help them consider alternatives that meet their needs.
Politicians make policy and implement policy, and do not require the formal consent of the governed to make and implement policies that affects them.	Govoxiers do not make policy but implement policy, and require the formal consent of the governed to propose and implement its office self-prescribed policy that affects them.
Charismatic-authority of politicians involves physical-coercion to changing the interests of the people by employing threat-power through sanctions or other means so that the people are forced to accept the alternatives that have been introduced and forced upon them.	Charismatic-expression of govoxiers involves physical persuasion to changing the interests of the people wholly through generating discourse to re-evaluate the components of their interests in convincing the people toward their relationship to other alternative interests.
The institution of politics emerges with protective-groups: such as the economic platform of capitalism, prison-system and the institution of the police-force.	The institution of govox-populi emerges with promotional-groups: such as the economic platform of ethno-corporatism, redeem-system and the institution of the lawdership.
Politicians make state-centred decisions in groups for the citizenry-society, or other forms of power relations between individuals, in the distribution of state resources or status.	Citizenry-electorate makes state-centred decisions for the govoxiers, or other forms of decision-making activities between citizenry-centred advisory bodies, in the distribution of state resources or social conditions.
Politics promotes the freedom of individuality, democracy, bureaucracy, and social-contract of class subjugation over the governed.	Govox-populi promotes the freedom of collective-individualism, populocracy, commicracy, and altruist-relations with the governed.
The theory of politics is the study of political ideas and values used to describe political practices, independent government systems, and their bureaucratic institutions.	The theory of govox-populi is the study of govoxical ideas and values used to describe govoxical practices, interdependent government systems, and their commicratic institutions.
The study of politics studies the government that exercise governance and their legislative processes.	The study of govox-populi studies the electorates that are governed and their legislative processes.
The study of politics and its sociological perspectives is considered a realism discipline that judged actions according to the ethics of responsibility in the affairs of a society in the exercise of power-class.	The study of govox-populi and its sociological perspectives is considered a humanism discipline that judged actions according to the ethical persuasion that treats society in equal or altruist-relations.

The position and duty-bound obligation of the govoxier in an ethnopublican society is revolutionary. Having to deal with society alone requires a lot of patient and a prayer. And the regulations and management of a society’s economy, with meeting the needs and wants of consumers, and to constructively resolving tensions between communities and hearing their concerns and to resolving issues, require special and essential skills. The working-group, the commicrats, pensioners, non-working group, all these demands of the govoxier will constantly and forever draw their interests in matters, for the govoxiers to protect their middle position in high prestige as the voice of citizenry govoxical populocratic rights.

The citizenry-electorates as the state legislators and decision-makers are therefore also revolutionary. Their conducts and duty in the affairs of a society will be most dependable upon by the working-group, the non-citizens who are residents in Africa and the govoxiers themselves. More so, the secretariats are reactionary in being always suspicious of any change in policies or laws imposed by the electorates with or no simple explanation, no matter how slight. This is particularly because the secretariats are duty-bound to keep society progressing as smoothly as it can achieve it to be within its capacity. If tension arise and some members of a community have been found to go rouge in some specified way, the secretariats are duty-bound to resolve their concerns, and thus defend their prestigious position of altruism as being in the citizenry’ interests with no favouritism. The citizenry-committees are devoted true-and-true with the people they governed; they will always keep the citizenry informed of changes in the social fabric occurring in their community that affects them all and any common thread thereof, they will readily desert their own opinion to place their views at that of the citizenry-society they represent.

Therefore, to be a govoxier requires one to assume the profession of govox-populi through its apprenticeship-training route or graduate certification academic route, as the only option if you are looking to enhance your existing vocational skills or educational knowledge besides any other fields of study to work in state government organisation in an ethnopublican state. Govox-populi as a social science study provides you with the skills and understanding of working in an interdependent commissioning governmental organisation, and improves your employability prospects to add working in government besides working in any other field or profession.

Working in government is a profession, just like politics. And since the job requirements of govoxiers and politicians working in government deals with materials from all other academic subjects, then it is a precondition that both their social science study should embrace the whole of all other academic subjects as distinct graduate certification course of study and to be recognised in the same way as a mandatory credential to work in government besides any other academic certificate one already have – a licence that gives government officials the educational credibility with professional upskilling that explores groundbreaking theory and a new area of social science interest developing in our fusionistic digital world – as opposed to how political science study is positioned as distinct social science subject-matter independent of any other academic subjects.

It has been talked about that the ethics of politics produce corruption and incompetent policymakers and that politicians arrive in state office with only one thing in mind – self-interests goals to money and power. Whereas with the shifting and fusionistic rules-of-engagement we find ourselves in the current 21st-century digital world, individual specialisation of knowledge is no longer sufficient in any works of life, and the plethora of complicated policy-making exercise in government to bear on the social lives of people in a society would require interdependent governing collaborations between those who occupy government offices and their regional citizens themselves who are governed – and not individual experts to influence social policy for government officials, as politicians are positioned to do.

Govoxiers are people in government who are not necessarily experts but are given the state persuasive-power to deliver information to the people and have the skills to address the audience and help them form opinions to make state-centred decisions based on the information they have been given. In this context, the study of govox-populi can be defined as the processes of organisation-management, information-delivery and advisory-body directed to strengthen the decision-making power of those who are governed to have the power to make state-centred decision that affects them all.

Indeed, there would be those in the minority who become a govoxier without an academic discipline or profession. People who take part in govoxical discourse as if it was their vocation, committed to matters of state affairs emotionally and psychologically. These are individuals who would dedicate their life and whole time to bring personal fulfilment to their regional people, and typically people we can easily regard as with talent as philosophers with natural charismatic personality around people, with specific corposense that demonstrate some immediate skills of information-delivery with little or no practice, and sharp-minded to gain skills rapidly with minimal practice. I recognised those group of people who have had no opportunity of formal education in Africa because of poverty or that condition of unhealthy and regressive experience that has plagued Africans since the inception of protégé-society; this group I particularly would encourage to come forward and take up vocational-training as govoxiers – in maintaining govox-populi as the core of an educated person, so they can officially depend on the principal source of their healthy-individualism.

It should be emphasised that govox-populi insists on institutionalising a particular skill set that is not common in other professions or academic subjects, of what I identified as: Charismatic-communication skill. Ultimately, charisma is the expression of govoxical discourse and interdependent skills. It is therefore essential that the proposed graduate-certification, apprenticeship-upskilling and vocational-training in govox-populi must learn to develop and improve their charismatic-communication skills required for the profession.

Also, govox-populi incorporates strategic communication consulting, public relations and vital elements of journalism and focusing specifically on interdependent leadership skills. As mentioned, govox-populi is an add-on or top-up certification course that requires one to already have an educational certificate in any other particular field of study, from science to art, medicine to accounting, or any other.

With governmental commicracy relying so much on the interdependency of leadership in government, school leavers could now make a suitable career in this field. A study in govox-populi also imparts an element of scientific knowledge and genetic understanding of human-nature in behavioural science focusing specifically on genesneurotype-environment interactions, and with the groundbreaking sociological study of morality and culture in human society focusing specifically on the study of collective-behaviour, community-service and herd-behaviour that are relative and derived from our current fusionistic digital world. The skills-set gained can be applied in related fields like marketing, journalism, communication consulting, and the likes. Essentially, everything involving human collaboration is govoxical, and govox-populi is a profession.

Commicratic Procedures of Govoxiers

When the German sociologist Max Weber introduced the concept of ‘charismatic-authority’ as a balancing conception for bureaucracy, he viewed it as: “a certain quality of an individual personality, by virtue of which the individual is set apart from others, endowed with specifically exceptional qualities, regarded as exemplary figure, and on the basis of them the individual concerned is treated as a leader.”

Max Weber’s conception of charismatic-authority finds its complement in the practical application of physical coercion between self-appointed leaders and the governed. I attribute the concept of ‘self-appointed’ leadership to extend to societies with no direct-democracy in practice as part of their political mixed-form of governance, regardless of whether their politicians were appointed to state office through citizenry elective-process or otherwise, and by this I ascribed ‘self-appointed’ leadership to those in state office with the power to make state-centred policies and implement those policies; where the people are not given any option to decide how their society is governed and thus feels they have no option but to go with the flow of the charismatic-authority of the leader.

Everywhere we looked, we see in the republican state because of its practice of mixed-form of governance that allows politicians to exercise bureaucratic procedures of charismatic-authority to make promises out of nothing and everything as it appears to them in dreams or imaginations to earn the people’s vote and win an election. And after winning the election and installed to state-office they seem to always develop a sudden change of minds and thoughts about issues and ended up making policies put to their office by their donors and redesign the ordinary voters’ policy request as they deem fit, and implement those policies regardless of whether the people like it or it benefits them.

This, I say, is what I called: Circuitous self-appointed leadership; I defined as a longer than the most direct way to self-appoint oneself to state office; a process by which candidates seek state-office through electoral authorisation and subsequently isolate themselves by design or coincidence from the burden of responsibility to their electorates. When we elect politicians to state-office to make and implement certain policies, and they ended up doing something different other than their electoral promises, then those votes that got them into government office could be said to be morally null and void, and the politician could be said to be a circuitous self-appointed leader in government.

However, it would be impossible to have any form of circuitous self-appointment of leadership in a govoxical society, mainly because the legislative-power and decision-making on affairs of the state is not under the control and delegations of the govoxiers. Govoxiers are not policy-makers, and they do not make state-centred decisions that direct the social and economic life of their citizens. When people vote for a govoxier in a govoxical society, they effectively vote for individual knowledge, including their conformity to the commicratic procedures and government regulations. Voters would expect candidates to understand the regional culture they asked to represent and of the African society, and some level of excellent verbal communication skills would be essential as well.

In such a society where the people are the policy-makers and their representative persons in government are of the primary responsibility to deliver information to the people and help them work out solutions in terms of decision-making, govoxical candidates would have the duty to prove to their voters that they have the analytical thinking skills and active listening skills to be their govoxier. Voters would also be interested in knowing the level of ability of a govoxier to think logically and reasonably in basing the delivery of information around the nature of things and their general attributes, to have the mental skills-set to pay attention to details in knowing when to advance discourse and when to back away, to be comfortable around the use of modern communication tools through social media platforms, television, radio and newspapers to reach out to people, and, of course, voters would be most interested in the persistence ability and determination of a govoxier to ensure their regional citizens’ policies can be shaped to pass the judicial test worthy of implementation and through to its secretariat implementation performance to the satisfaction of the policy-makers and their service-users.

The consequence of the procedural process which deals with govoxiers in state-office and the methods they use, including the standards of policy engagement which defines the role of govoxiers as those who do not have the power to make policies but are responsible to implement them – a model of the proposed commicratic interdependent governmental leadership authority in state-office, is the recognition of an ethical system of governing I introduced and called: the concept of charismatic-expression for commicracy – not as a balancing conception for it, but as the pronounced expression for commicracy.

This charismatic-expression of commicracy I speak of finds its complement in the practical application of physical persuasion between interdependent leaders and the governed; where the people are given the power to decide how their society is governed in the day-to-day decision-making in the administration of government and policy-making and thus feels they have the option to seek govoxical opinions and be persuaded to guide their decisions or policies through the charismatic-expression of the leader.

I attribute the concept of charismatic-expression to the ethics of our human-nature that generates a connection between people – the bond that attracts one to the existence of the other, that distinguished element that orient attraction to certain types of social recognition, by which an individual is recognised of being capable of fulfilling certain tasks, conferred with an office to carry out state duties, expected to engage in information-delivery to the people and to deliberate with them to make decisions that concern them all, and based on them the individual concerned is treated as a leader.

The charismatic characters of govoxiers take many forms. The charismatic-communication skills that are essential as one of the key ingredients for the educational award in govox-populi are effective learning that approaches individual learners differently and models the charismatic learning approach according to their unique personality. Personalisation is the key feature of govoxical commicracy, and the charismatic-communication skills that the govox-populi educational approach appropriates would reflect this basic experience; to make it commonplace for govoxiers to use different communication tools and platforms that are a perfect fit for each individual personality to engage effectively with the people. This course would consider each learner’s communication preferences.

I recognised that there are talents in everyone, and each of these talents cannot be evaluated through communication skills alone. As humans, we all have our individual communication preferences and in which environment we are most comfortable and able to focus to engage effectively with a wider audience and information-delivery, ranging from video-conferencing through online forums to pre-recorded video webinar. The charismatic characters of govoxiers would have technology communication tools at their core, giving the people multiple options to find the time and place that suits them best to engage in matters of state affairs as citizenry-electorates of their respective regions.

Politicians are already embracing the web-internetisation technology for their communication tools, and we see there are more available options that these technology communication apparatus could be utilised further, and this requires the development of software in a certain order that govoxiers would take full advantage of and ones that would be purposively developed for govoxical system of governance.

The most effective online communication tools incorporate a variety of different content types to show visual cues and get a message across in such a way that considers different languages, accent, or disability such as the blind or the deaf. A pre-recorded webinar may include animations, scripted videos, play-back podcasts, video-conferencing questions and answers sessions, info-graphics, and more. These contents we would make available on mobile apps, so the people could customise their communication preference to suits their personality. Short polls at the end of each information-delivery session through mobile-apps are also an effective way to introduce policies for people’s considerations, and a way to persuade the people on alternative policies that could meet their needs.

Voice-blogging through mobile-app communication conferencing is also an important way to encourage people from different locations to congregate together in govoxical-discourse on specific issues, and it would also allow people from the same region to communicate with each other about govoxical issues and decisions to making and shaping policies without having to be physically present together in the same building. The important is, contents can be revisited and reviewed to refresh one’s knowledge about issues and give people a rich experience and insights on various issues, even to take references on govoxical matters outside their regional boundaries.

Govoxiers, by working on their information-delivery or discussing the nature of things and their general attributes, it is open to them to collaborate with traditional community leaders or govoxical enthusiasts within their regions to create networks that are directed to help shape opinions and motivate the people to be persuaded into taking on certain policies that are favourable to their community.

If all the system is put in place as this manifesto preach; from information-delivery by govoxiers to the people, and to the people making their decisions known and routine submissions to their local Lord-councillor’s office for writing up policy and procedure documents, up to the StateLords’ Assembly considering the policy submitted to them for ratifications or approval, and to the final performance required of the secretariat office to implement the procedures of the policy; should not take more than a month for individual undertaking if all goes smoothly as described.

For programmes that span weeks and months, group gatherings on computerised technology platforms would be better placed as the most efficient mechanisms than our current generation political ethics get in a face-to-face environment in a room, and there would be dedicated govoxical media platforms, managed and regulated by the Technology department within the Govoxical and Constitutional affairs secretariat-ministry, that would be in operation in every region across Africa in their day-to-day govoxical-discourse with their govoxiers, such as polling, video communication conferencing, voice-blogging, information-delivery web-portals, StateLords Assembly news channel, secretariats implementation medium, the economists’ happenings, the citizenry-committees discourse, and more.

The Technology department would provide digital services to African government departments, and for the coordination of technological wares and government-media related platforms, and for maintaining an information system and databank servers for storing, processing and securing data of all govoxical affairs. The collaboration between the Technology department and Govoxical and constitutional affairs secretariat-ministries would enable govoxical programmes to be standardised on the computer-technological platform, and African people with a diverse range of backgrounds, languages, and locations, would contribute and enriching the govoxical interdependent engagement with government officials on affairs of the state.

Personally, I believe that when the people are given the tools and legislative-power to make policies, state-centred decisions and shape the administration of government to meeting their needs from time to time, with the supervision and guidance of the judiciary, this would help widen the skills pool and knowledge-base of what is expected of state government in our current fusionistic digital world.

Whilst it is a fair comment to recognise the recent efforts of the African-Union member states in securing the long overdue ‘Continental Free Trade Area’ founded in 2018 with trade beginning this year 2021; I say, not only the fact that bureaucratic procedures of politicians would set itself at work by their normal practices to hinder this progress but the fact remains that the AfCFTA remains under the capitalist economic model serving the interests of the last vestige of the global capitalist class that are still using African economy as their breathing ground to extract resources as they pleases.

Apart from the fact that the global corporatist economic model-type of road transport infrastructures that could connect the whole of Africa as fast as flight has still not been installed to make the Free-Trade Area operates efficiently and to produce the fastest growth beyond the imagination of the sceptics, but I do not think that the service functions of the police would dissuade them from mounting their repetitive checkpoints and illegal transit bribes payment against transporters of goods, including the corrupt antics of immigration officials’ incessant demands for illegal payments and harassment of traders and travellers across Africa.

The fundamental issue of individuals’ primary need for money would not easily be resolved by simply saying police checkpoints would be reduced from operating on our public roads across Africa to enable free trading to take effect without constraints. The question is asked, with the necessitous road network and the below-standard mode of transportation in Africa at the moment, what regulatory arrangements are in place to ensuring the free flow of goods across regional boundaries in encouraging full participation of every ordinary African to engage fully with the AfCFTA performance to make it work for everyone and not just for the few rich traders across Africa?

I say, we desire AfCFTA performance to work for all Africans. Whilst the AfCFTA framework is merely a persuasive step as an encouragement for all member states to commit to the unitary form of all African states as ‘One’ nation and ‘One’ nationality, and given the history of protégism relations still mollycoddling with our economic affairs in Africa, the state of our affairs in Africa currently in our history is self-evident: if our state governments in Africa at the present actually desire real economic progress for Africans and to leave a legacy desire of reverence to our future generation to come, now is the time for building an ethnoism framework for much deeper ethno-corporatist economy and ethnopublican state that guarantees for the full integration of African states, to make African economy as equal partners in the global economy, and to improve the social life of Africans within the HomeLand and of those in the Diasporas.

Any failure of our African governments at the present to deliver the reorganisation of all African states that is capable of collective creative actions in this digital world of fusionism would continue to reproducing the development of underdevelopment across Africa, and the working-group would continue to fall behind with access to the most up-to-date skills to thrive in equal measures with their counterparts in other countries outside of Africa.

The commicratic procedures of govoxiers is a multi-functional approach – in the sense that each African states would be adapted to continue delivering the diversified mechanism that is impactful to their citizenry-society socio-culture and condition of life and their regional economies, but this can only be done interdependently with other African states. The AfCFTA, as an example, is a strand of the culture of interdependency.

The culture of Interdependency generates equalism relations between people; Independency generates a culture of the class-system in society, and the culture of Dependency amounts to slavery or extreme form of protégism. History and experience have shown that both autocratic-governing of Dependency as we had suffered by it in the chattel-era and experienced its protégé-governing in the colonial-era, and the political-governing of Independency as we are experiencing it now post-colonial are not conducive to our modern 21st century age to patriotic appeals, both in the national African interests and in the promotion of the proposed African States govox-populi governing of Interdependency solutions to achieve African economic revival from protégism to socio-economic empowerment of all African people collectively.

The state power position of the Govoxiers

When we think of the term ‘power’, the negative connotations of the word are often the first to come to mind. The positive connotations of power are often associated with the ability or capacity to do something or the achievement of a purpose. But the question of what power is, in the right sense of the word, is not solely based on how it has frequently been described and understood throughout history or the meaning we ascribe to it in our everyday usage of the word. For such attributions to the govoxical question of what the state power position of govoxiers means and what it is, takes a position on the ‘persuasive’ definition of the term ‘power’. So, I asked a simple question: what is persuasive-power?

To understand the persuasive-power of the govoxiers, we need to first understand the way humans engage in, forge and interact within social relationships and of the recognition we ascribed to our understanding of how we individually gain informed-knowledge. To put it simply, persuasive-power is all about influence and nothing more – an inducement of information to influence the behaviour of others or the course of events.

When book-authors write books to be published so people could read and be inspired and be motivated by it; when politicians seek expert advice and guidance to help them shape policies; when we are prescribed medication by the doctors to influence our internal complaints to change course for the better of our well-being; when we attend schools and listen to teachers so they can impart us with their knowledge of things to influence and reinforce our career interests or direct our individual social purpose in life; when we attend religious worship and listen to sermons and be influenced about the supernatural realms of existence; when we are constantly bombarded on the high-streets and shops with advertising messages, images and social-media influencers on social-media platforms urging us daily to take certain actions or become a fan of a celebrity; when we joined online dating platforms and engage another person to be influenced and persuaded into a romantic relationship or otherwise; when we apply for jobs and tried our utmost to convince employers of our potentials; when we read fictitious novels, or watch fiction movies or computer games with role-playing, we inevitably got influenced and are persuaded about what is possible or can be achieved within the realms of human-nature.

Everything of human behaviour exists through the power of persuasion by one and to the other. Persuasive-power is the expression that sustains the concept of govox-populi with commicracy; it is the fellowship that drives charismatic-expression; and the altruist-relations that highlights the operational character of govox-populi within commicratic organisation.

Here, the question of what persuasive-power is, and what content has been ascribed to the state persuasive-power position of govoxiers would be laid bare. First, I reach the view that human societies have only had two nationalism-structure of state: monarch and republican. The autocratic state power of the monarch is exercised utilising authoritative-power, while the republican forms of mixed governance exercised collective-power of political parties. The authoritative-power of the monarch is clear-cut and there is no ambiguity about it, but the collective-power of the republican state is a mix of intensive-power to rule by the military government or police state, and the nature of authoritative-power is proportionate to governance rule by elected politicians. The republican also have an element of diffused-power relationship where political parties compete for state power, and also an element of extensive-power to engage in indirect cooperation across national boundaries with other political parties that they shared similar views on affairs of the state.

While the collective-power of the republican state is identified as political-power, and the authoritative-power of the monarch is attributed to be linked with military-power, but the persuasive-power of govoxiers proposed in this manifesto has its source from ideological-power which involves the power of logic or intellects, of expertise in a particular field of study, or career of experience or informed-knowledge, of self-evident of the govoxiers over ideas and beliefs that the people may have on affairs of the state.

Based on this observation, the persuasive-power of the govoxiers is the empathetic ability to lead others to know, embrace and personify the true-knowledge of the leader. It speaks of the intellectual ability of the govoxiers to discovering information for use to impart informed-knowledge onto others or to guide them to achieve their aim. It also speaks of the approach of commicracy between the govoxiers and their citizens to share ideas and enabling individual citizens to making their decisions independently based on that information. It is also about the culture of interdependency that recognised the govoxiers as the influencers of social relationships, that tasked individuals with practical knowledge production, with such leadership mindset that allows govoxiers to make sense of and navigate the situations they encounter, and skill set of an educator to unlock their peoples’ potential and unleash their creative minds to achieve success. It, in particular, recognises govoxiers as experts in conflict resolutions, and communicating information, with such dedication to state duty and social integration of society in which they govern. The Persuasive-power of govoxiers then becomes the core of an interdependent leader.

Indeed, it has been scientifically talked about that emotion is the overriding human behaviour over logic, and that expressive-emotion is the driving force of our human persuasive-power of information exchange between people. And that when we expressed emotions and demonstrates them in pitch and gestures we become more understood than when emotion is not expressed at all. Since emotion determines the way we expressed behaviour to transmit information, where body-language is open to interpretation as much in equal measure as voice; how, then, does the humanistic emotion of the govoxiers impact on their persuasive-power within the charismatic-expression? Should there be a need for analysis between the individual humanistic emotions of govoxiers from their logic; or should we rather engage ourselves in the anatomical scrutiny between govoxiers intellectual power to persuade constructively and fairly and still able to separate it from any construed bias they may have, consciously, subconsciously or unconsciously?

The question of what makes an ideal govoxier; or what the ideal type of expressive-emotion of a govoxier is, is not an area I dare like to venture into. I mean, we are human – and emotional beings, so to speak. Before we can venture into a question of emotion, we can only venture into the individual aspect of it since there has been no certainty in which it can be conveyed universally without the risk of failure, because what applies to one individual within the subject-matter of behavioural-science almost does not apply to another.

But it is clear and is not in doubt that the ability of govoxiers to lead relies on the culture of interdependent leadership with their people, and also that different govoxiers would rely on using different communication tools and platforms owing to differences in communication preferences and in which environment individuals are more comfortable and able to focus to engage effectively with a wider audience in their information-delivery exercise. There is, I would say, no one right way we should expect emotion to be expressed in the course of persuasive-power of information-delivery. When people emphasised too much on such behaviour such as to ‘always maintain eye-contact’, or that to ‘always keep a smiley face on’ as the best form of demonstrating engagement with your audience, and such like; but, I say, an exaggerated form of emotion doesn’t suit everyone. Since the charismatic-expression of govoxiers does not include any of these things either, then it is not such an extraordinary admission to say that persuasive-power of govoxiers does not deal in any form of exaggerated emotions of any kind and individual govoxiers must remain true to who they really are, by nature.

To be a leader in specific works of life requires key skills. The key skills that derive from Dependent-leadership and Independent-leadership are fluid and ill-defined – too much of it everywhere. The religious clergies who occupy leadership positions of authority at the place of religious worship conform to divine rules or tradition that God is the motive, emotions and rationality of their leadership authority and that they have no legitimate direct control above their own leadership as they exercised it over their followers. This form of leadership is clearly a Dependent-leadership, in the equal proportion that we would describe a dependent authority between the monarch and their proclaimed legitimacy of state-power over the people as derived from the authority of God. What and how any of the two groups – the clergies and the monarch – then do in the exercise of the proclaimed authority of their leadership or the forms of governance they employed to exercise power, is immaterial to their proclaimed legitimate attainment of it. I, therefore, concentrate in particular on the proclaimed legitimate attainment of their leadership, which positioned their authority to be a Dependent-leadership to God.

Independent-leadership I ascribed to republican states and capitalist business owners with their bureaucratic system of control, convey their hierarchical organisation in which those in a higher-rank of superiority over others strictly control and discipline the activities of their subordinates. This is particularly an Independent-leadership because those in higher-ranks position within the organisation makes the guidelines and prescribed the rules, and enforce those rules with the power to exercise discretion to change rules as at when it pleases them, and to amend their organisation policies to favour their endeavours as their individual persons when in such power sees fit. Those in lower-ranks had to work hard to assume higher-rank where they could exercise and assume the leadership within the organisation with such authority. The leadership position as president, prime minister, and business corporate executives and directors alike fit this description. The superiors are not dependent upon anything or anyone else as the proclaimed legitimate attainment of their leadership. Their leadership, therefore, remain independent of anything else with the power to prescribe guidelines and rules and policies they have the power to change and amend its essential qualities and enforcements as they sees fit, and thus positioned their authority to be an Independent-leadership to themselves and themselves only.

Interdependent-leadership is what I proposed in this manifesto and ascribed to ethnopublican states and the ethno-corporatist business corporations with the commicratic system of organisational management – with its levelled horizontal organisation system in which everyone within the organisation has shared control of authority and one is equally interdependent upon another in the division of labour and allocation of tasks. Interdependent-leadership is based on the collaboration of one with the other, or between groups. In consequence, the Interdependent-leadership of the govoxiers depends on collaboration with those they governed and the people conformity to their own prescribed policies. Without the input of the people, the govoxiers would not have any policy to implement or guidelines to follow and enforce. The proclaimed legitimate attainment of their leadership positioned their authority to be an Interdependent-leadership to their people.

Those who claimed that the term ‘leadership’ is fluid have been mistaken because of the mixed forms of governance that the three main types of leadership appropriate interchangeably. It is possible to see an Interdependent organisation with individualistic elements of imposed authority with the character of an independent-leadership amongst the group – this is simply to show how individuals can coincidentally introduce corruption of mixed-forms in rules-of-engagement to any leadership structure – because it’s not only Dependent-leadership organisation and Independent-leadership organisation that are vulnerable to mixed-forms in rules-of-engagement, it affects Interdependent-leadership organisation all the same.

A distinction has been made here between the three main types of leadership, and we’ve probably experienced in our works of life the inconsistencies of how Dependent leaders can also exercise the same forms of governance with Independent Leaders (and vice versa). The key difference is that Dependent leaders based their authority as derived from God, often associated with supernaturalism – it claims to know the things we know we do not know but choose to accept its existence regardless – thus placed their moral position in that world akin to placing our faith on ‘Pascal’s Wager’: that posits that humans bet with their lives that God either exists or God does not. If you believe God exists, and he does, you win; but if God does not exist, you lose nothing. But if you believe God does not exist, and he does, you lose; and if God does not exist, you lose nothing. So, wager that God exists, so you don’t lose if he exists. In effect, this is what Dependent-leadership based its attainment of authority to lead – God – the existence of which philosophers recognised as Pascal’s wager.

Independent-leaders are isolated from any associated dependency with maintaining the status quo of realism, often associated with the theory of naturalism that represents subject-matter as it sees it to be and avoiding speculative fiction of any kind or supernatural elements even – it claims to know nothing of which we know nothing of, and acknowledged the existence of things that we know something of and can experience with the evidence of our own eyes – and thus it exercise leadership authority in its own right.

Interdependent-leaders, however, based their attainment of authority to lead on shared-authority with the governed, with recognising the value of existence, often associated with the theory of humanism that emphasises the value of the agency of human beings, individually and collectively – it claims to know the things that we know exist of which we can interact with meaningfully, emotionally, and physically – for, we are all humans, and no human being would claim not to have existence reality with another human being or the nature of realism anyhow.

This affirms some notion not only of rights and freedom to ourselves as humans, but it applies to all conscious existence that humans can collectively claim to interact meaningfully with in some way. And, as a result, it gave a right of recognition to each of their existence as a collective, such as animal rights to protect the rights of dogs and cats, especially because we interact emotionally and physically with them to a certain extent. Even sea animals such as whales and others, including wild animals like lions and snakes too, are given the recognition of a right to be protected in our modern laws, and the rights of elephants not to be murdered for their tusks. This also applies to plants and trees owing to our human emotive relationship with our natural environment and nature of existence in general. Everything that exists and we can interact with in some way is within the purview of protection under the interdependent-leadership organisational authority – made possible through our current generation productive campaign efforts of populocracy in the challenge of democracy.

As you already may be aware, even though human society is still very much under the Independent-leadership of political organisations in state government, but, to quote Karl Marx: that “when people speak of ideas that revolutionise society, they do but express the fact, that within the old society, the elements of a new one have been created, and that the dissolution of the old idea keeps even-pace the dissolution of the old conditions of existence”. This speaks directly of the elements of humanism value of agency of human beings expressed above. Even though African society is yet to achieve the governmental condition of shared-governance between the government and the governed, but the elements of recognising and grant of rights and protection to all conscious and unconscious living-systems we can collectively agree to interact meaningfully with in some way, are already in performance and keeping even-pace with the dissolution conditions of the last vestige of the Independent-leadership organisational performance in human society the world over.

The state power position of govoxiers, as made clear, is a persuasive-power that is exercised through charismatic-expression and operates on a system of interdependent-leadership authority of the govoxiers with their people. The key skills that derive from Interdependent-leadership through the proposed educational training in charismatic-communication skills, in maintaining govox-populi as the core of an educated person, would impart the career discipline in people-management that involves the charismatic ability to garner large crowd of people enough to complete a project and help the people pursue their own goals. It also would indoctrinate strategic-thinking skills directed to help the govoxiers develop how to help their people develop a vision of what their social needs are and to work together to accomplish them, including how to approach challenges and overcome obstacles. There is also the planning and delivery skills on the various ways govoxiers can carry out their information-delivery to the people, including how to implement policies and regulates them to achieve the ideal vision of their people for the people.

This also includes organisational skills, risk management, policies management skills and planning, including communication-style and oratory skills are also an important area that would equip govoxiers to work out the most suitable ways to engage effectively with their people and to engage actively in periodic interactive questions and answers sessions – on how to build rapport, listening skills and assertiveness of information-knowledge and how to communicate effectively in difficult situations.

We also talk of the coming to terms with change-management and overcoming resistance to change, and why and how govoxiers should anticipate sudden changes in their plans and management with the people, with understanding and implementing changes. There are also the persuasion and influence skills that would equip govoxiers to learn when to advance a discourse with the people and when to back away in the face of debate turning into an argument. The skills that would be learnt here would also equip govoxiers with the various effective ways on how to discern the pros and cons of policies and to play safe with procrastination and predicting potential outcomes of a decision in different circumstances and scenarios. These and more would equip govoxiers with interdependent-leadership skills and practices required in a govoxical society.

By isolating government from policy-making and making them responsible for implementing policies, would require the above set of skills and attitudes as interdependent leaders in a populocratic society. Just as people with certain behavioural personality can find dependent-leadership or independent-leadership as something that comes naturally to them, a state of mind that suits their personalities which of course would make them appear successful at it in their natural flare of exercising authority, so as interdependent-leadership would suit certain personalities and is a state of mind to some people as well.

Indeed, different people would intrinsically be drawn towards any of the three types of leadership position, but the fact remains that each leadership type has a place in each era that had existed in human society heretofore. Our current generation, with its fusionistic digital world, promotion of equalism and altruist-relations between humans which extends to animal rights and protection of our natural environments and much more, befits the leadership officialdom of interdependency between the government and the governed, in which the persuasive-power position of govoxiers in the proposed ethnopublican state is introduced with a befitting sense of equalism-delivery-system for us all in African society, on account of this manifesto.

CHAPTER FIVE

TOWARDS GOVERNMENTAL POPULOCRACY

If the western civilisation of democratic culture in Africa throughout the colonial-era and to the present post-colonial era of politics has weakened against the tide of the expanding populocratic cultural practices developing on the platform of global web-internetisation networking in our current generation, both the failures of democracy and successes of populocracy is the inevitable epochal shift between two cultural strands of contrasting principles.

As it will become apparent from this manifesto, the current crisis of bureaucracy is the product of the historical processes of the eras of ancient societies the world over. Although the theoretical expression of populocracy – because it provides the platform for the legislative control of the state by the citizenry-electorates to make laws and exercise decision-making control over the administration of government in society – without the governing conditioning of govox-populi basic principles as its disseminating seedbed, the governance of populocracy would be vulnerable to corruption with attempts to weaken it with a mixed-form of governance and would struggle to operate to the desired effect beneficial to the people.

This theory of govox-populi has made modest advances towards the bare existence of the theory of populocracy, although not clearly defined in the first-volume of this manifesto or anywhere else in this second-volume until now. But the fourth-volume of this manifesto is dedicated to the govoxical theory of populocracy in its bare existence.

However, it should be noted that at the level of legislative-power holder of the state, the inequalities between the government and the governed based on the exercise of class disseminated through the political mixed-form of governance, under the banner of democracy, have been annihilated from the govoxical theory of populocracy. Although democracies have been successful in securing state patronage to those whose ruling-class’ elites holds monopoly or a disproportionate amount of state power in government, and while the people are left to overt inequalities, covert discrimination and policies formulated to exercise authority in law in creating wider social divisions between the government and the governed.

But whenever the people have been successful in raising resistance and campaign, or come together in solidarity to fight oppression, democratic resolution have always been some patchworks to the legislation and not an overall reconstitution of the democratic social structure itself. In the development of this manifesto, the social structure of democracy has been abandoned and proposed to be abolished in Africa in its entirety, and the theory of populocracy have been advanced to be the appropriate govoxical structure for the governing administration of govox-populi – govoxical-populocracy so to speak – which literally means the governmental structure where the legislative-power of the state is under the direct control by citizenry-electorates.

To put it simply, populocracy is a govoxical system where the electorates must elect their government and take part to exercise direct control over the day-to-day administration of government, as government officials do not make state-centred laws or conduct the legislative-power of the state.

Populocracy, which literally means “people’s rule” or “rule by the people”, is derived from the word populism; and populism, which literally means ‘the rise of the “people”‘, has been defined as a range of governmental approach that presents the people or citizens of a nation as influencers of stated-centred decision-making on affairs of government.

Populocracy is the service-arm of govox-populi government; it is the movement of the people to campaign with one voice and action towards a common goal; it is that mighty roar in the ancient society, the populous voice of the people of ancient Jerusalem to crucify Jesus Christ in the Bible book of Luke 23:18-25; it is the global antislavery populism of the voice of the people in support of the African people in the Diasporas in the 19th-century, in demand for the abolition of slavery of African people in western societies; it is the Pan-Africanism populist-movement titled-‘One Africa, One Hope’ in the 20th century in demand for the independence of African nations from western colonial rule; and, here and now, populocracy is the voice of this manifesto arousing Africans both in the HomeLand and in the Diasporas to rise together in one voice and demand for the implementation performance of the unitary form of all African states into a ‘One’ national body – ‘One Africa, One Hope’.

I claim that populism is the first form of governance that culturalised human-society the world over. History shows that the pronounced expression of populist view has been systematised in a multifaceted way in human culture and habits since the beginning of our human social activity on earth.

The unified expression to migrate out of Africa across national boundaries since the Stone-Age era, the interconnections of Africans and criss-crossing the globe in the Bronze-Age era, the pace at which ethnoist egalitarian societies were developed in clustered of Africa in the Iron-Age era, the ways Africans lives were debased in the Chattel-era with the forced migration of Africans out of Africa and its build-up to the united front against slavery and for its abolition, and how our socio-economic lives got restricted in the colonial-era and its lead up to the widespread demand for African independence from colonialism, and with our generation emerging age of global corporatism with its digital revolution that is nudging African society collectively to reawaken to the global happenings of the restoration-era around the world; can all be understood within the framework of the populist expression of populocracy.

The populist expression that sees socio-economic customs as inherent to socio-culture is the individual actions that are expected, social behaviours that are shared, and standards that guide collective behaviours in an ethnopublican society. Populism is the animating force that attracts a community of people together in associational-ethics under the banner of race, ethnicity or religion in our human society.

I argue that the expression of the term ‘community’ that stems from the word ‘common-unity’ and has its inception traced back to the Stone-Age era (2.5 million B.C to 3,000 B.C) that documents the recorded history of human migration from primitive Africa and gone on to populate other parts in the world. The migration of a group of people to disperse in different directions is what we used to describe the concept of ethno-migration. The descendants of the early human ethno-migration from Africa to different parts of the world had given us the appearance of human society into a diverse form of ethno-states of nationalism-culture based on race alone – the diverse ethno-states of Asian Mongoloid, European Caucasoid, African Negroid, Australoid, are just a few of the now outdated representative form of grouping human population by nationality the world over – and that every notion of nationalism is relative to the populist expression of our common-unity in some way.

For example, when we say we have the right to exercise our democratic right, we are in its fundamental sense expressing the populist expression of democracy – that, it is not democratic to restrict the right of people to protest, for example, and the act of protest is populocratic in its own right. This is to show that no organised social function or forms of a governing system can exist without some form of a populist approach. Populocracy, in this context, can therefore be defined as the condition of being grouped in allegiance to a cause, or as belonging to a nation, based on the proclaimed common-unity of the people who practice its populist expression or occupy its social structure.

It is therefore the case that the accepted criteria of nationalism that had existed in each generation in human society the world over, conforms to the proclaimed populocratic expression of the era in which they exist, collectively. For example, the Stone-Age era (2.5 million B.C to 3,000 B.C) documents the recorded history of human migration from primitive Africa and gone on to populate the rest of the world. The effects of climate change or the needs to escape from unfavourably economic conditions for the simple will to survive, depending on the region and period in time, brought about the existence of ethno-migration of living subjects since prehistoric times. By this alone, it is easy to identify the populist expression of those who occupied the Stone-Age era to be ‘socio-economical as inherent to socio-culture. People migrated from place to place, localised in different parts of the world, each in a permanent population within a defined territory, based on their self-willed capacity to conduct their kins-folks socio-economic provisions for economic self-sufficiency subsistence.

As each cluster of the human population grew across the world, with their arrays of faith with Nature developed from within their immediate natural environment owing to the natural order of humanistic devotion to human welfare, African society developed into the Bronze-Age era (3,000 B.C to 1,300 B.C). The Bronze-Age era documents the recorded history of the development of ancient-Africa, with the kingdomised governing institutions influenced by ancient Nubians that later developed to ancient Egyptians to the rest of Africa, with the settled agricultural economy and a more centralised society of different cultures and languages cohabiting sides-by-sides across Africa, inherited the appearance of ethnorace from the Stone-Age era and grew into the clustered of ethnoburb of particular ethnic groups in the Bronze-Age era across the world. It is therefore easy to identify the populist expression of those who occupied the Bronze-Age era to be ‘ethnicity’ or ethnic beliefs and culture as inherent to socio-culture.

The subsequent Iron-Age era (1,300 B.C to A.D 1450s) documents the widespread formation of approximately 10,000 different institutions of kingdoms and self-governing governments and empires across Africa. Indeed, the Iron-Age era inherited the inherent culture of ethnicity from the Bronze-Age era, denoting or derived from the reverence to ethnic customary ways of living practised by groups of community inherited from the Stone-Age era, with each acknowledging the religious culture of another – but not subject to or influenced by. This is how the populist expression of those who occupied the Iron-Age era we recognised to be the era of ‘religion’ as inherent to socio-culture.

The distinct African Chattel era (1457-1847) documents the loss of African history during the force mass migrations of indigenous Africans to western societies for forced concentration of economic labour. The Chattel era was an unstable period that lasted for three centuries. The populist expression of religion inherited from the Iron-Age era influenced by the populist expression of ethnicity inherited from the Bronze-Age era developed the era of human-society into the era of ethnorace, where the racial feature of people was inherent to difference to a group culture, rather than biological differences merely. This is how the populist expression of those whose lives were affected in the African Chattel era was known as the era of ‘race’ as inherent to socio-culture.

The era of ethnorace that forced human society to function as racial groups and sees race as inherent to culturalism had also existed in the same period in the Africans diasporas’ proclaimed populist expression of their generations, in conformity with racial feature to be identified with nationalism-culture. The western society Early Modern Era that began in 1450 ended in 1800 with the Age of Reason we recognised as the age of the Enlightenment, which saw the re-examination of govern-mentality, economic relations and social fairness, before giving way to ending all resistance to race to be seen as a biological difference and not inherent to culturalism – partly because of the urgent situations of populist wars in America between the northern and the southern states in their long-standing disagreement over the institution of slavery, and the subsequent world-war-1 across Europe that required the commissioning service of colonial soldiers – both of which saw the growing need for unity between the races and the social pressing need for a new populist governance, which nudged the evolvement of the colonial era of African society to be divided into groups of ethnicity and emerged into the populist expression of different ethnic-groups identifying themselves by ethnicity under a single nationalism-structure since the 19th century. This is how the populist expression of those who took part in our African Colonial era (1885 to 1980s) can be recognised as the revival of the era of ‘ethnicity’ as inherent to socio-culture.

However, the populist expression of ethnicity that developed in the 19th-century was a strand of its preceded one that had existed in the Bronze-Age era, and it is developing into its dissolutions within the material condition of the web-internetisation technological revolution in the Modern-era in our generation the world over, with a new form of common-unity of socio-economical interests emerging the restoration-era in the 21st century.

The world of the Bronze-Age era was primitive and was merely influenced by the simple way of life of the socio-economic relations of its preceded Stone-Age era. But the Modern-era inherited both the good-fortune such as science and inventions, and the bad of too much of everything that had gone wrong in human society the world over – wars, slavery, revolutions and the attack on race across the world.

With the 20th century proclaimed populist expression of ethnicity, it institutes the class institution of politics, advance the notion of the Enlightenment, the socio-economic platform of capitalism flourished, fortified the power of government with the institution of police states, and developed the computer-technology industry in which computer-intelligence advances came to define the social and economic fabric of our human society the world overall – all on the back of the common-unity of ethnicity – the ‘we’ and ‘them’ mentality that turned out to be the driving force of groups of people with shared common-unity to compete to strive to do better than the other.

As shown, since the appearance of our humans on the planet, all the eras in our human history reflect the multifaceted culture of populism. The shifting social eras in Africa since recorded history began, starting from the Stone-Age era, the Bronze-Age, Iron-Age, Chattel era, Colonial era, and to the Modern era, all represent the multi-dimensions of our African populist expressions and conditions of life.

Since capitalism, for example, we’ve seen the increasing pace and scope of migration of people physically crisscrossing around the world for economic reasons. With the emergence of global corporatism that brought about the digital revolution of web-internetisation platform, this increase in migration has now developed into what I recognised and called: ‘Interlink-Immobilism’, I defined as the globalised localisation of people across national boundaries without physically criss-crossing the globe or moving from place to place.

Interlink-immobilism simply means ‘to present oneself in another location without moving’ – establishing communication through mobile phone or social-media is increasingly becoming an essential form of corroborating one’s identity in our current 21st-century generation everywhere in the world. We rely on mobile interlink to interconnect and engage physically, forge social relationships, for entertainment, leisure and economic purposes, and as well as to interacts with one another throughout life.

For one to interlink-immobilise means to present oneself to others in another location without physically being present in the recipient location, and vice versa. Interlink-immobilisation is what we do when we engage in instant communication over the phone to another, to communicate by email, but not by letter – which defines the essential condition of interlink-immobilism as only within the existential condition of ease of connection or instant interaction between people without delay between messages getting from one to another. Interlink-immobilism also applies to the internet connection we make through social media with friends and strangers alike, and when we shop online on Amazon or eBay and engage in instant interaction with shop-attendants without physically being present in front of a shop customer service in person.

The interconnection of people in capitalist society only has telephone communication as its instant interlink-immobilism, compared to the instant ease of connection of messages on mobile devices through web-internetisation apparatus as we have it in the current global corporatist society. Interconnection through letters or through a messenger to travel physically is what I regard as falls under the socio-practice of interlink-mobilism, whereas our current corporatist society emerges with it the expansion of instant mutual connection of interlink-immobilism beyond telephone communication to through web-internetisational interaction without one being physically present at the recipient location.

Thinking of interlink-immobilism in terms of the expanding global populocratic expressions of people across national boundaries – everyone with their mobile devices at all times, the instant interaction we make through social media platforms and e-commerce giving each and everyone one of us the sense of personal satisfaction and gratifying – is a productive framework for understanding the socio-cultural environment and of its web-internetisation economy of global corporatism, in which our current 21st-century generation find ourselves in place in our economic pursuit for survival the world over.

The collective-individualistic dimensions of interlink-immobilism, and because it typically placed people across national boundaries in ease of instant connections and immobilised-crisscrossing accessible to anyone and from anywhere around the globe which creates both economic opportunities and socio-cultural challenges for all and to the exception of no other in our current global corporatist society, has been one of the cross-cultural tools that have deposited the theory of commicracy onto the path towards governmental populocracy.

The web-internetisation free-market of economic interests that is changing the dynamic of how individuals from anywhere earn a living in human society the world over; the free culture of socio-cultural differences across social-media platforms that is influencing the unitary form of global culture and language in our everyday life; the free-educational learning resources on internet platforms that are imparting knowledge and skills and meeting the specific needs of specific individuals regardless of location around the world; the open news information across national boundaries delivering mobile news from anywhere and to everywhere and accessible to individuals around the world, and more; are just part of the collective-individualistic dimensions of interlink-immobilism that are providing instantaneous interconnectivity influencing populocratic behavioural interests between people across national boundaries in our current generation.

Everywhere we looked, we see how social-media is explaining the globalisation of behavioural change in human society around the world; we see how web-users globally are the gold-standard of collective-individualism; we see how every new generation of those in their teens are more relational orientated with computerised technology than that of their parents; we see how the free-culture of education and socio-culture including open-access of information and open-government is transforming and influencing the culture of individualism into collective-individualism; and we see how the web-internetisation platforms have deposited the social condition of altruistic-relations between individuals’ rules-of-engagement, producing the diverse populocratic culture of collective-individualism of everyone and from everywhere the world over. I say, we are the evidence of the populocratic expressions of our fusionistic digital world and its changeable social conditions of our everyday experience from our historical social conditions in human society the world over.

Promoting the govoxical culture of populocracy

With the proposed theory of ethnopublicanism and commicracy, the promotion of the govoxical culture of populocracy has been influenced to occupy an introductory space in this second-volume of this manifesto. It is natural to think that the govoxical theory of populocracy is the condition in which a society of people practices the culture of commicracy not just in their social and economic life, but in their family dynamic and beliefs also.

While this is in fact true, but the govoxical theory of populocracy goes deeper than one may have imagined. As a result, while this manifesto is promoting its govox-populi government and ethno-corporatist economic institutions and values – non-monetary economy, collective-individualism, egalitarianism, altruistic-relations – as the path for the prosperity of the African people both in the HomeLand and in the Diasporas, but the govoxical theory of populocracy is the instrumental value of ethnopublicanism as a necessary social custom to deliver such prosperities this manifesto preaches.

Ethno-socialism sought to arouse the enthusiasm of the African people and instil horizontal management structure and solidarity in the social fabric of African society for a better order of things – shared-governance, collective-individualism, economic empowerment and social justice. While the theory of socialism find within its power the strength to liberate the oppressed from the oppressor, but the theory of ethno-socialism is the power that springs from the weakness of the oppressed to free both the oppressed and the oppressor and elevate them both to equal-governance of things.

The govoxical theory of populocracy, therefore, is the instrumental value of ethno-socialism that manifests itself in the form of altruistic-relations between people. We say that the social condition of one to engage another must perpetuate altruist-relations between them in an ethno-socialist society. Equally, we say that for those who govern to have the continued opportunity to express their governance over the governed, they must keep up the populocratic expression of altruistic-relations to achieve that common purpose. A just social-order is the seedbed of ‘altruism’, which is nourished by empathy for the welfare and happiness of others, equalism between the races and gender, open-data of information and intellectual-property, open-access to education and knowledge, free-culture and the right to express oneself.

The govoxical culture of populocracy, therefore, refers to a set of govoxical arguments addressing inequality in social intercourse and challenging the powerful influence of monetary-economy in human society. In the present order of things across Africa, we are perpetuating the social condition of the practices and culture of bureaucracy in our social life, economic life, family dynamic and beliefs also. We are nourishing the social-order of class-system, which is nourished by the economic greed of individualism, family dynamic premised on inequality between the genders, beliefs in ethnic-divide and religious animosity, and social intercourse premised on a top-down approach that sees those in higher social-status or with the power of money place themselves above the top of the social hierarchy in society.

I say, such bureaucratic order of things is incompatible with the commicratic order relative to populocracy. Instead, the bureaucratic order glory in reinforcing and perpetuating social inequalities that arise from the nature of human diversity – such as gender, race, sexual orientation, beliefs and culture, diversity of corposense, and the fulfilment of differences in education and general knowledge of things resulting in the culture of classifying people intelligence based on IQ-test alone.

Against all these, I argue that any form of social structure, that emphasises class-system and the people’s subjugation to its social inequality, as domains of our human society social expression, is not suggestive of the expanding populocratic culture of our current revelation-age instituted by the platform of global web-internetisation movement taking place. In fact, such a social structure belongs to the past and not representative of our 21st-century socio-culture of collective-individualism – of, openness to all; and closeness to nothing.

I say all the efforts and passion devoted to the modus operandi of practising class-society could be used in a much more altruistic way, and the expanding socio-culture of populocracy is taking up initiatives to address the structures of class, not just everywhere around the world, but in African society as well. All those who remain subjugated and afraid to express their healthy-individualism on issues of social equality and social justice must be free to do so under the socio-cultural condition of populocracy.

The general focus of promoting the culture of populocracy is to foster social awareness that recognises the right of individualism within the altruistic-relations of the collective as the principle and moral expression of social-order in society. As it will become apparent in the proposed volume-4 of this manifesto, populocracy seeks to challenge the dominance of monetary-economy that triggers economic-class in society on the one hand, and the ruling-class by representatives’ form of governance of the republican states to govern society by power-class on the other, in defining the socio-cultural avenue for a populocratic development in Africa.

Under the impact of the proposed ethno-corporatist economic system in Africa, the govoxiers would manage the economy-branch of government as the permanent mining-ground to reinforce economic-equalism and how the activity of socio-economic culture goes through cyclical change overtime to define family dynamic and cultural beliefs to measure the instrumental value of social change across Africa. And the policies guidance to all these would be underpinned by the decision-making exercise of the citizenry-electorates and accomplished by the govoxical activity of the citizenry-centred commicratic agencies, to promoting economic-equalism of all within a greater collaboration of collective-individualism.

Unlike politicians being made responsible for policy-making and to occupy their time with confronting growing inequality and social fragmentation caused by the condition of the class-system their republican mixed-form of governance created in human society, but govoxiers focus instead on implementing citizens prescribed policies that show forms of ‘inclusive practice and ‘diversity culture within each of their regions across Africa.

While we have seen changes taking place within other social structures, such as democracy, ethnocracy and the likes, with the practice of ‘inclusion’ in direct-democracy and ‘diversity in indirect-ethnocracy, but, I argue, that they still very much remain class-led and bureaucratic. For social policy under populocracy, various forms of experimentation and innovative ways of living the social life in the pursuit of equality and diversity will be the order of a societal drive for development and social advances.

Within the state-power of the citizenry, we develop the proposed citizenry-centred commicratic agencies to carry out public services as commissions within the public-sector, to serve as the platform for the regional community to develop and innovates on their pronounced populocratic cultural expressions. Here, we shall experience the restoration-era of public-service engaging actively with people inter-regions in the form of a national ethno-socialist mass organisation network of citizenry groups.

This would emphasise the potential of the executive-arm of government’s expanded network for the delivery of a wide range of public utilities to members of regional communities as multi-use centres, maintaining the concentration from the basics to the significant and intervening when things go wrong within their region or relationship breakdown between people to be combined with innovation. And here, populocracy will have direct impacts to challenge those cultural practices either derived from ethnic-beliefs or religious ones that may attempt to resist change for equalism and diversity to flourish between people in society.

If we are to focus on the natural order of things as Africans, we cannot deny the ancestral histories of our African indigenous religious beliefs in pantheistic doctrines with Nature which, in fact, is synonymous with the biological diversity of our human experience in behavioural-science – as the means of opposing the inequalities being perpetrated within the knowledge of belief-condition of ethnic customs or other non-native religious beliefs imposed upon African people during the ancient conquest of wars or colonialism; where the satisfaction to acting only what you believe is not related to the satisfaction of its truth-conditions that can be scientifically proven. I say, the proposed restoration-era in Africa is the promotion of the socio-economical customs as the principal component of identity for all people of African descents in the HomeLand.

The govoxical expression of populocracy emphasises the importance of propositional-knowledge and empirical communication using reflective-knowledge to derive understanding from it – where physical observation of things and the evidence of its existence takes the place of opinion that are derived from using logic and reflection – for a healthy govity. The cultural expression of collective-individualistic custom is a right and is crucial to any process of populocratic change.

Everywhere we looked, we see the increase in activities of populocratic expressions challenging the old conditions of existence – tearing down the walls of the legislative-power of government in societies; shaking the very foundation of bureaucracy in the work-place across industries; promoting the culture of equality, inclusion and diversity on practices; combating discrimination based on race and ethnicity across national boundaries; globalising individualism and integrating the connection of people into its new condition of collective-individualism through its promotion of its web-internetisation platform; and opening up the doors of privacies the elites built up over time to our public spheres.

What not to love about populocracy! After all, if God created humans in his own image, then I say, it is in appealing to the possibility of human exploits that God himself reveals himself to us, is it not? The limitation of human behaviour, the very condition of every individual’s action as a collective, the motives of individuals and the bearings of their collectives, must be within the very guidelines governing the socially acceptable behaviour of God.

Therefore, when we hear of such a cry of injustice blaring from the corners of the adherent of democracy against our deep respect and admiration for populocracy, and attempting to turn populocracy against itself for challenging the very ground the institution of politics stands upon, it incites our sense of exhilaration and to linger a little longer over whatever democracy loathe that populocracy is unravelling. Matshona Dhliwayo, the Zimbabwe philosopher famously said, on quote:

“A great storm is like a sunny day to a person of great faith. A gentle wind is a like a great storm to a person of great fear”.

All that we the adherent of populocracy desired to point out to the adherent of democracy was that the elements of the magnificent revolutionary changes that is deconstructing the system of politics all around the world at the present, as we have seen in the delivery of Brexit between the United-Kingdom and the European Union, the far-right populist support for Donald Trump’s presidency in America against the status quo regardless, the worldwide populist support for Barack Obama presidency as the first African descents’ president in America, the increasing success to transferring knowledge over the internet and to integrate mobilisation of people into campaigns and ease of advocacy, and more like; contain within politics the seeds of its own destruction, and that, since its republican nationalism-structure has drawn all of its strengths from oppressing the people with its ever-growing mixed-form of governance in the judiciary, executive and legislative-power of government at the expense of the governed people, it invariably drew all of its weakness for having not willing to consider interdependent-leadership of shared-governance with the people as a governing method, everywhere.

We say that the failure of politicians to recognise the changing landscape of state governing apparatus brought about by the web-internetisation platform of global corporatism, with its ease of instant mobilisation of the populous to campaign with one ‘voice of the people’ against any form of misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance by government officials or their bureaucrats in the government office, the inevitable levelling of power-class to its horizontal effect between the government and the governed, this institutionally unmask the elites – the politicians, the media journalists, their foreign economic trading partners and large corporations, including the bankers and their advisory-bodies of experts – as merely operating as a homogeneous entity with self-serving and class interests above the interests of the people, and this has driven the populous society on the path of socialism for our salvational purposes merely.

The politicians cannot agree on what counts as ‘The People’; they have neither the ambition for egalitarianism nor the drive to commits society to the impartiality of governmentalisation; they equate diversity to class and prescribe guidelines and change rules in the daily attack against the helpless and our most respected online activists too, with rampant misuse of computerised technology to increase state surveillance to keep the growth of populocracy repressed on the internet; they make policies by the mere appearance of the distinctiveness between people with different rules-of-engagements that perpetuates inequalities and social divisions in society; they present the gait of government, the manner of independent-leadership, the costume of authority and accent of state power; they would pass laws they conjured up out of their own self-interest goals. And yet how tiring to the senses with the routine manner in which society is bound to suffer the impact of how politicians are readily predisposed to cutting spending in services that benefits the people most, with directed funds towards their own prescribed inflated expenditures and the leisurely manner in which they execute their own prescribed laws to implement those policies! They fail in producing even that impression of meeting the interests of the people they purport to govern, and which is their only reason for existing as government anyway. As a governing method, I say, political- democracy is a complete failure!

But, you govoxiers would commit to the governmentalisation of inclusion – of governing people into the affinity of interests with the culture of instigating compromise between two extremes. With the biological diversity of human nature set in motion the diverse societies of culture and beliefs, in which people develop a natural attraction to differences in interests and opinions with global sharing that easily placed people into social groups across web-internetisation networks. I say, this is a form of populocratic expression that has been leading to the inclusion of a significant majority of people to campaign in one voice, people whose rights get trampled by the politics of power-class exercising domineering authorities over the people they govern in society. I asked though, is populocracy dangerous?

I say, Aye, populocracy is dangerous – because any form of governance that places the legislative-power of decision-making in the hands of the people it governed is dangerous against the power-class of government and their elitism in society. That is precisely what we want, to have interdependent-leadership of the government’s ‘rule by the governed people’.

To our dismay, that’s not what democracy means in practice. In theory, democracy claim to commit to independent-leadership of politics with the slogan: “government of the people, by the people, for the people” – Laughable, is it not?

But it has since failed to recognise that any form of government for the people is authoritarian at the expense of the people, and that government of the people is the rule by the people to decide their own laws and exercise control over affairs of government with such flair of direct-democracy, and that government by the people is a society with socialist governance with no form of institutional government and people govern themselves by common-design of their common-good in society with such aptitude as it was in the primitive-communism.

The populist movements around the world have risen through the web-internetisation platform to see the dawn of light, and find that politics is merely a government for the people, and nothing else. As a natural result, this manifesto has spoken against democracy as treating people it governed worst and treats the ruling-class and their elites in luxury to exercise state power to meet their own interests at the expense of the people. The 21st-century is a turning point in our human history, simply on account of this manifesto, for populocracy to relentlessly continue to ‘pulling up the draw-bridges and battening down the hatches’ as Catherine Fieschi had lamented against the rise of populocracy, in her article titled: “An Introduction to Populocracy”.

There is actually a straight-forward and simple answer to the problem of democracy and its institution of politics in our current 21st-century affairs. Indeed, it is undeniable that populocracy has resulted from digital revolution and emerged with it its global web-internetisation platform; we do not question the fact that computerised networking and its social-media platforms have created the increase in ease of connection and speed at an unprecedented scale within organisations; no one disputes populocracy has burst asunder against the normal operation of politics across governments the world over and invoking the wraths of politicians to recoil from their political activity of politricking; it is beyond the reasoning of doubt that populocracy have created the platforms that has forced every politicians to daily being confronted with direct engagements with people from their constituents to address personal concerns on affairs of government, making politicians to feel more vulnerable and more connected and more interdependent with local agencies and experts in decision-making; neither do we fail to see how politicians are struggling to keep-up to understanding political expectations of people they governed nor the impacts to the political sense of how the walls of privacies the political elites built are turning up in our public spheres.

The notion that the ground of democracy that politics stands upon – that is currently going through a propositional phase to be replaced with populocracy – that the adherents of politics are now clamouring to reclaim back to democracy, is anarchical. The fact remains that the people affected by state-centred decisions have revolted and now demanding to take over control of the decision-making power in government that affects them personally.

It is laughable, is it not, when the adherents of democracy claim: to care about diversity, about representation, about pluralism, about compromise in the face of difficulty, and protection for the most vulnerable; and yet no political government has so far willing to share the power of the state with the people they governed. They say they want to reclaim the forms of governance back to their democracy and to “steal back what populism took – the claims of authenticity, to genuine understanding, to fairness;” and yet no political government has so far willing to relinquish the power of independent-leadership in state government for an interdependent-leadership with their populous citizenry-electorates.

There is an African proverb that says: whilst “the thief does not steal in an unfamiliar place,” but “the frown on the face of the goat will not stop it from being taken to the market”, and moreover, the adherent of politicians and their notion of democracy have served their time in society, and it is in our generation that we say, they “do not get used to other people’s things“. The moral of this proverbial phrase, as interpreted to me, is here translated to simply to remind the adherent of democracy; that, society belongs to the populous; the power to confer governance to those in government belongs to the populous, and it is anarchical for the elites to attempt to get used to the power of the state that belongs to the populous.

Everywhere we looked, we see the rise of authoritarian regimes in government everywhere in the world brought down to their very kneels by the rise of the populous. The populous will continue to rise everywhere around the world with their nature-given right to populocracy. Politics and its democracy do not speak for all people in society, and this is the generation that will eventually install the populous as the power-holder of their respective states, and they would exert their authority to reinforced citizenry-electorates rules on the day-to-day administration of government, and to increase accountability of government officials across the world. I say, ethnopublican state is the society where the populous becomes the government and take back control of the legislative-power in government to resolving their own caused social problems, and to be solely responsible for the course of their society’s social and economic successes and of its ills.

Shared-Governance: The Inevitable Path for Citizenry Empowerment

The shift from the independent-leadership of politicians to the proposed interdependent-leadership of the govoxiers is an inevitable path for citizenry empowerment in an ethnopublican state, and for our social and human development in Africa.

The commicratic organisation mode describes an interdependent associational-relation, with a shared allocation of authority based on adeptiveness, and horizontal shared-power structures. Decisions are made by the regional citizenry-electorates and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government, and decisions that are made by the citizenry working-group are regulated by the economy-branch of government respectively, with no domineering authority or higher or lower social-status between the government and the governed. Policies and decisions of the citizenry-electorates are submitted to the government by the citizenry-legislative-arm of government, and policies and decisions of the citizenry working-group are submitted to the government by the economy-legislative-arm of government. The judicial-arm of government is responsible for the interpretation and translation of policies and of the decisions of the citizenry-legislative and economy-legislative submitted to the government and implemented by the executive-arm of government.

The govoxical administration model proposes a balancing state of consistency between interdependent qualified-citizens – the government and the governed – the StateLords, secretariats, citizenry-committees, economic-unionists, citizenry-electorates, and the working-group – each with no hidden agenda on affairs of the state.

However, the position of citizenry-electorates also represents those who are not citizenry-electorates, such as those below the electorate-age, foreign residents and visitors alike. The govoxical procedures propose an organisation of qualified-citizens, with a productive and mutually beneficial arrangement of state governance and consensual decision-making processes involving all qualified-citizens in interdependent governance associational-relations on affairs of the state with those in state office affected by the decisions. As a result, the inevitable path for citizenry-empowerment in an ethnopublican state is the govoxical system of shared-governance of an interdependent governing institution wherein decision-making responsibility is shared among the governed with those in state-office affected by the decisions.

Shared-governance in an ethnopublican state recognises the govoxical contributions of the govoxiers as an advisory governmental body that provides non-binding strategic advice to the citizenry-electorates who are responsible for the determination of decisions in an elective-process. The state-power position to make decisions through elective-process by a group of citizenry-electorates fosters a sense of empowerment to the individuals, their collective shared-sense of governance on affairs of their society and ones in control of their own interests in ensuring the successful outcomes of citizenry policy and governmental implementation of the decision that has been made by the majority. The formal nature of the govoxical system gives greater flexibility in decision-making structure and implementation management on affairs of the state.

The citizenry-branch and the economy-branch of government operate as an advisory-body to those they governed, the secretariat-branch of government operates as the executorial implementation body, while the judicial-branch of government is the interpreter and translator of policies to ensure its legitimacy and compatibility with the constitutional law of the state and thus operates as the governmental body of constitutional law interpreter. All govoxical government bodies direct and regulate all available state-owned resources and the useful-values of citizenry service-users toward implementation that meets the interest of the decision that has been made and submitted to them as prescribed by the decision-makers – the citizenry-electorates.

With the legislative-power of the state in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates, it creates the social incentives over social divisions that demolished the walls of barriers of tribalism and class that plague political administration of government; it bonds the government and the governed into a supportive interdependence relationship with a share responsibility that counterbalance the workloads on government officials to concentrate more on implementation performance that fully harness government efficiency; it levelled the power of the state and spread out the lines of authority within the govoxical administration of government into equality relations with the citizenry-electorates; it admits citizenry-electorates as state-officials and the govoxiers and their commicrats as government officials, and effects the social incentives to the role of the govoxiers to act as advisory-bodies that guides the citizenry-electorates through the process of their decision making exercise; and in addition, the shared-governance would perpetually seek to extend the social incentives by developing policies and guidelines to strengthen the interdependency between the citizenry-electorates and the govoxiers.

The model of the commicratic shared-governance in an ethnopublican state is a process that is here defined between the roles of the citizenry-electorates and the govoxiers. The function of the govoxiers as the governmental advisory-body to the citizenry-electorates is to offer technical advice and expert opinions to influence the decision making of the citizenry-electorates. The govoxiers are also responsible for the implementation performance of policies and decisions that have been made by the citizenry-electorates, and influencing the decisions of the citizenry-electorates toward their regulatory performance and the day-to-day administration of government on affairs of the state.

The govoxiers who will occupy the government office as citizenry-committees and economic-unionists would be accomplished professionals and resourceful to offering innovative advice and dynamic point of view on a wide range of issues within their level of expertise. Meeting fortnightly, govoxiers can provide information-delivery of agendas to their electorates, strategise directions of policy with them, guide the quality of their decisions and improvement to translate it for the judicial interpretation process, and coordinates meeting programs in consensus by everybody.

We should expect to see bodies of electorates whose role would be to take particular delights to attempts to exercising control over the decisions of their fellow electorates by establishing informal govoxical-centred groups to direct to challenging the authority of their elected govoxiers. These are individuals with known or rather unknown ambition to become govoxiers themselves, or just aficionados and enthusiasts on govoxical matters with such claim to have the skills or the experts’ knowledge to challenge intelligence work being done by the elected govoxiers. They should be expected to stand out at every govoxical meetings with such claim to challenge research work the govoxiers may rely upon – the outspoken, diligent and articulate ones who may appear to have differing ideologies to things designed to influence decisions of the electorates – in opposition or variants to the govoxiers.

Earlier though, the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional Affairs already been tasked to regulate govoxical-centred groups and their missions based on the ethos that informal advisory-bodies – as govoxical-centred groups – could also provide non-biased information and advice to their fellow electorates.

But, both the citizenry-branch and economy-branch of government highly recommends that the advisory-bodies of elected govoxiers in government are a more suitable solution for the electorates who want access to informed-knowledge of the happenings on the seat of government with high-quality advice and guidance on policies that would benefit the people. The secretariat-branch of government rather encourage citizens to create informal advisory-bodies and for those groups to register their organisations with the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional Affairs, and to be recognised as professional organisations working as informal experts advisory-bodies in different areas of social life, such as science, law, govox-populi, medicine and health, history, geography, chemistry, behavioural-science, family counselling and relationship experts, technology and engineering, computer information technology, editorial policy group of experts, agriculture and farming, and many more.

The secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional Affairs, because it is the corporate policymaking governmental department for the secretariats and for the office of the secretary-of-state, it has vested interests in encouraging the formation of informal govoxical-centred groups in various fields led by govoxical minded and savvy citizens. It has been mentioned in volume-1 of this manifesto that this ministry is proposed to introduce a computer social networking site and to regularly hosting govoxical conferences that would reflect the govox-populi government administration and to encourage citizens to contribute innovative ideas and raise issues to galvanise social research and development in any areas of social life.

The position of the secretariat-branch of government, because it is the head of government with a larger responsibility to regulate the administration of the overall govoxical government smoothly in making sure aims and goals are set as they should, and it recognises the main reason for encouraging the creations of citizens-led govoxical-centred groups as informal advisory-bodies for the electorates to choose to seek their second opinions independently of the govoxiers on issues to aid in the electorates’ decision-making process.

Although the govoxical centred groups are not the official advisory-body of government and they are not elected by the citizenry-electorates to work on official capacity, but their position in society is given legitimate recognition by the state and they would be regulated by the secretariat – under the private-sector – to regularly assess their functioning capacity for providing the electorates with informed scientific knowledge on issues that concerns individuals or groups, and that they are capable to make their clients understand the technical aspects and outcome of decision scenarios, and help individuals with the strategic thinking of the end-goals of what and how each eventual decisions would impact their lives and their communities as state-officials in the management of their society.

The ethnopublican legal structure is of the view that shared-governance between the government officials and the governed must be counterbalanced with altruist-relations by any means necessary. This includes the equalism relations that encourage any citizens with issues of concerns to be free to seek a second opinion from an independently regulated establishment, with equal capacity as the govoxiers, to give information-delivery and experts advice on affairs of the state that give the electorates some focus.

Indeed, citizens should be free to seek advice and guidance from those whose qualities complement their individual nature of collective-individualism, and not to be limited in informed-knowledge by being moderated by the knowledge and skill of their elected govoxiers alone. Regardless of where and from whose advisory-bodies an electorate rely upon to influence any of their bi-weekly voting decisions-making participatory responsibility, advisory-bodies exist to merely strengthens the machinery of government by helping the decision-makers to make better decisions on affairs of the state that foster equality-delivery-system in society, and no advisory-bodies can legally interfere with the authorities of the judicial to interprets policies or the jurisdiction of the secretariats to implement the performance of the decisions that has been taken.

There are criteria for operating a govoxical-centred advisory organisation in an ethnopublican state. First, advisory organisations are staffed and operate under the economy-branch of government and are regulated by the secretariat-branch of government. The regional location of an advisory organisation should be determined by the socio-cultural customs and economic establishments in operation within the region. The field of experts of the advisory organisation must be sought and expected within the region they operate and have an established presence. It is ideal for advisory organisations to have multiple knowledge and adeptiveness that are of use and in demand in the regions in which they operate. Any advisory-body or govoxical-centred group with no clear and defined definition of what area of expertise can be sought from it or what advice should be expected to be given by its practitioners, would not qualify for the practice-licence to operate in an ethnopublican society.

The primary duty of the proposed Economy and Citizenry advice Industry headed by an economic-unionist under the regulatory governmental body of the economy-branch of government is the robust monitoring of establishments it staffed to ensuring their efficient management of resources – material and labour-resources – are providing direct use-values to citizenry consumers with no waste of resources or deceptive or corruptive practice by any means.

The secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional Affairs that regulates all established advisory-bodies or govoxical-centred organisations would regularly seek to determine the steady focus of their missions, whether an advisory organisation is maintaining what it sets out to do on its memorandum; or has broadened or narrowed its advisory services in any way, shape or form in its course of operation or practice. The focus of the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical Affairs is its diligent record-keeping and robust monitoring of govoxical-centred organisations to determining each of their common goals and organisational interests at any one time, and to providing support guidance to organisations on each of their specific product features.

The existence of govoxical-centred organisations operating across regions counterbalance the persuasive-power of the govoxiers to provide equality of distributional-power to the electorates that a govoxier may have over them; to influence the quality of advice and raising the standards of information-delivery of the govoxiers; to mitigate the effects of the distributional-power of others to persuade the electorates to help them pursue hidden agenda or personal goals and interests that may work in adverse benefit to the electorates and their society; and to influence the efficiency and effectiveness of the govoxiers in their govoxical meeting exercise with their regional electorates.

Therefore, the proposed Economy and Citizenry Advice Industry would provide a master-organisational arrangement for govoxical-centred establishments as advisory board members and staffs required to operate efficient advisory services to the public. It is recommended that an advisory-centre should have at least an expert proficient in a particular field and certified competent to offer such advisory service to the public.

It is also recommended that individuals hoping to establish an advisory centre with no prior experience in the advisory industry should start-off from a fairly small size of at least two-working heads, and the regular regulations of each of their services and product feature would determine if the organisation have the skills and persistent determination required to expand the size of their firm, which considers the need to employ more experts or research-trainees to join their advisory board members and researchers into becoming a larger group and to qualified to be staffed accordingly by the Economic Advice Industry. However, it is noted some advisory agencies, such as the editorial policy group of experts, would require quite a significant number of staffs from their start-up.

The success of a govoxical-centred advisory-body will be measured by how effective the group’s activities may have made impacts in govoxical happenings from within their regions – discourse and debates and such like – in particular, ones that may regularly attract the attention of the media and televised or aired on radio or other news media platforms.

The secretariat-ministry of Govoxical Affairs, because it would regularly host govoxical conferences to engage the public in govoxical discourse in all areas of social life, it should be expected to routinely host intellectually stimulating govoxical debates, apart from during the times of election, between govoxiers and professional advisory-bodies for the public to measure the corposense character of govoxiers or an advisory-body to providing valuable advice within the area of their expertise.

In fact, there would be a practice-guide that would be provided to advisory-bodies at registration with the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical Affairs. The practice-guide would detail best-practice that an advisory-body must conform to, and that would guide the practice awareness to show that their advice to any member of the public concerning govoxical matters must be readily available or open to public knowledge, and also that while the Economic and Citizenry Advice Industry have organisations that deals in govoxical matters and private matters (such as behavioural-science, family counselling and relationship experts, and more like), but govoxical related matters are not private matters.

However, it should be expected to have suspicion raised in accusation against some govoxiers of information bias – both the citizenry-committees and economic-unionists – and frankly individual govoxical-centred advisory agencies can equally find themselves labelled as being bias in their informal information-delivery and independent advisory service, often to questioning the behaviour that one sees as steering outside the norms of govox-populi.

The standard-practice that would be required of govoxical-centred advisory-bodies must adhere to also take the form of provision of appropriate and informative advice to those who access their service individually or as a group. While each piece of advice should address the point in issue, it should also take the form of written-documents by email or website-page or paper-copy provided to the service-user.

An advisory-centre should also collect and store the contact details of everyone provided with advice on govoxical issues that are still active, so those who had been provided with information can be easily provided with updates or any changes on the quality of advice given. Public knowledge of every advice generated from an advisory-centre at any one time must be made available on their website and consent to reveal the identity of service-users on public platforms shall be sorted and agreed to by the individual service-user. As a result, it would remain in the official recommendation for advisory-centres to have an online presence to facilitate instant mobile-apps information-delivery and advice materials to the public on govoxical affairs of general public importance.

Another best-practice for advisory-bodies is to be committed to govoxical happenings within their regions and beyond that affect their regional communities at any one time. They should also be ruthlessly proficient in information sourcing with the flair of investigative journalistic ethics. Whatever the perceived govoxical interest or objective research that an advisory-body relies upon, the information-delivery templates that advisory-bodies must use in practice including the govoxiers, reflects the best-practice guidelines that separate by default individual personal beliefs or persuasive opinions from fact-finding or research analysis.

The role of advisory boards members that the Economy and Citizenry Advice Industry recommends to staffing advisory organisations to operate efficient advisory services to the public, mitigates the exercise of high-degree of individual influence on the conclusion of advice to the public. At least two people are the start-up requirement to qualify for the formation and practice-licence to operate an advisory service agency, and this is simply to influence the moderation of personal beliefs on the quality of advice given to the public.

It is deduced that whilst ethnic beliefs and religious customs are more influential on the quality of an individual’s personal opinions on issues, but the proposed information-delivery template is generated to allow service-users to distinguish between that advice that favours personal sentiments from those that expressed personal intellectual values and objective beliefs of true scientific opinions on issues, and electorates to be persuaded by it to make their decisions.

It is through working in a govoxical-centred advisory capacity that operates primarily to challenge the govoxiers and their work that individuals can be known within their regions and well-recognised and more familiar with people within their community to be elected to government as govoxiers, so it ensures them to actively commits to govox-populi at the seat of government and gives them the experience of the position of govoxiers and how they relate with matters of state affairs. Sometimes, though, it is possible to see govoxiers appoints independent advisory organisations to carry out specific research tasks on behalf of the government – nationally or internationally.

The practice-guide that applies to govoxiers mentions the need to collaborate with external agencies, if necessary, to source information and fact-findings on issues. This is one obligation that govoxiers would claim to take most seriously and to be prepared to engage in relations in the interests of their regional constituents. Collaborations such as this give credibility to advisory organisations, and it placed the reputation of the govoxiers involve as reliable interdependent leaders.

Beyond the regulatory practice-guide that the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical Affairs imposed on the office of advisory organisations to must adhere to, advisory-bodies would influence such professional culture to always want to be seen by the public as outdoing the govoxiers and would portray such character to be expected to commit to information-delivery and advisory service to the public in equal capacity.

How a govoxier or an advisory-body sees itself, and how an individual member of the public sees them individually, will differ from person to person, I suppose. The notoriety or otherwise the reputation of an individual that works as an advisory board member in a govoxical-centred organisation would also influence the public portrayal of the advisory-body and what they may be capable of in investigative research and the quality of their information-delivery and character of their advice. The secretariat’s Regulatory-code and the economist staffing procedure do not interfere with an advisory board member or the profile character of who submits an application or otherwise has been accepted to work as part of an advisory establishment, but the secretariat ensures that advisory board members remain efficient and manageable, and the economist ensures that advisory organisation has all the resources and adequate facilities it needs to operate to the standard and legal-Guidelines set by the citizenry-branch of government.

As it has already been made clear, the routine engagement of advisory organisations with the position of the govoxiers serves the one condition of shared-governance with the citizenry-electorates, from challenging the works of the govoxiers by the routine operation of their industry, to working in collaboration with them in research and information-delivery. As a result, the benefit of having govoxical advisory organisations in society empowers the citizenry-electorates in the following ways:

1. Shared-control – this involves the freedom to have equal shared-control of the decision-making in the administration of government – that is, citizenry-electorates exercise control of policies and how implementation performance is carried out in government.

The govoxiers and advisory organisations exercise shared control over information-delivery and advice to the electorates. Individuals can choose to rely on the character of advice that suits them best at any one time. Collaborating with advisory organisations and subcontracting them with the authority to act on behalf of the government on part of larger govoxical affairs stabilise the interdependent-leadership of the govoxiers, empowers the citizenry-electorates as decision-makers on affairs of government, which thus strengthens the position of govox-populi government as the government’s voice of the people.

2. Innovative – this involves freedom to experiment and explore recently identified phenomena of innovative ideas which may fail or results in success.

Since advisory organisations can be subcontracted to operate as errand manager on official capacity for the govoxiers, and with sometimes on different norms to the guidelines that govern govox-populi, with strong international link and catalyst to practical development in other countries oversees, citizenry-electorates may compel their govoxiers to subcontract an advisory organisation to draft out innovative policies to challenge the judiciary to commit to innovation and experimentation that has been the basic tenet of commicracy that embraces ethnopublican legal theory.

3. Accountability – this involves freedom of personal govoxical responsibility to the citizenry-society.

The presence of an advisory organisation in a region, a specialist in a particular field, helps provide accountability to the citizenry-electorates to keep their govoxiers to work twice as hard with their overall govoxical goals. For example, a govoxier knowing that a govoxical-centred advisory organisation operating within a particular field, say behavioural-science, creates the observant mental pressure needed to accomplish more and cover all the bases required to produce robust information-delivery and objective advice around every govoxical matters on behavioural-science to be based on scientific facts to the electorates, and not based on beliefs or unsubstantiated opinion that could be easily challenged by the advisory-body.

4. Freedom of persuasion – this involves freedom to persuade others and to express them freely without interference, and to be persuaded by others on matters of opinion – that is, freedom to persuade and to be persuaded.

Citizenry-electorates may choose to invite advisory organisations to address them officially at local govoxical meetings on the merits of candidates competing for a government position as govoxiers before an election. Involving advisory organisations in govoxical vetting process of those competing in an election to become a govoxier helps the citizenry-electorates to be exposed to a wide range of opinions and background information of a candidate with charismatic-expression and skills to drive the govoxical affairs in ways that suit the personality of the majority within the region. The citizenry-electorates are also able to individually assess the temperaments of candidates and their competency to be compliant to the practice of interdependent-leadership, including the potential of each candidate and to observe the chemistry between them before casting their votes to choose a candidate by the rule of the majority vote.

5. Degree of efficiency – this involves the immense degree of freedom that the citizenry-electorates have to output efficient improvement in government.

A govoxier and an advisory organisation operating within a region may become too merged in their networking and collaborations to a point where advisory ingenuity results in too much of unanimous information-delivery and advisory services acting together as a single undiversified whole between them. When in doubt, citizenry-electorates are free to seek second opinions from other independent advisory-bodies operating outside their regions in enforcing transparency and accountability in their regional govoxical affairs, with such efficiency that brings in line improved regional governance in strategic directions to maintain or rather restore the empowerment of shared-governance to the people.

6. Degree of consistency – this involves the level of consistency between a well-formed expectation; the advice that is given by a govoxier and how individual electorates perceive it to be in achieving a degree of consistency between the formal advice given and the decision of the electorates based on that advice.

The workload of govoxiers will often make it difficult to attend to individual members of their constituents seeking further clarification on any topic. Govoxiers will often find it necessary to collaborate with advisory-bodies to provide ongoing advisory services on behalf of the govoxier. The sub-contracted advisory-body can then provides follow-on advice or information-delivery and establish the degree of consistency on the particular issues to the public on behalf of the office of the govoxier. The advisory-body receives recognition for committing to govoxical affairs. This raised the reputation of the govoxiers with the ability to reach individual members of their constituents in providing quality advice and ensure a request for further information and clarification on any topic is taken formally.

7. Impartiality – this involves impartial information, advice and support to be expected by the electorates from govoxical-centred advisory bodies. The sole mission of advisory-bodies is to level the equality gap of shared-governance with govoxiers and provide the same level of information and advice to the public.

There would be such cases where advisory-bodies representing a govoxier to provide follow-on advice on a particular topic, but where the advisory-body holds a slightly different opinion or tentative view on the particular topic. Whilst a govoxier may express differences in opinions to the advisory-body its office subcontract to formally provide the same degree of consistency to the public, but this shouldn’t impose any barrier for advisory-bodies to express their own issues and offer impartial advice to the public on the same topic. In fact, such advisory-bodies could be a safe-bet for electorates to seek advice and test the diverse options on a particular topic.

8. Citizenry control – this involves the power of the electorates to direct the implementation performance of policy or offer changes in the decision that has been taken.

Citizenry-electorates are free to bring any changes to policy or changes to decisions that have already been judiciary ratified on any matter – before or after it has been implemented by the secretariat. Even the govoxiers who occupy the secretariat-branch of government and responsible for implementing policies cannot legally change their implementation performance and how it has been described to be done without the express approval of the branch of government where the policy originates.

9. Peer Guides – this involves the collaborative relations between govoxiers and advisory-bodies. A govoxier may require an advisory organisation to provide advice and guidance on focal points on a particular issue, and the rights of advisory-body to make information request from government bodies.

There will be situations where govoxiers may need professional advice to help shape opinion on a particular aspect of his or her information-delivery and advice to their constituents. While govoxiers would normally combine information from different fields and from different sources to provide a fuller picture when taken together to form opinions needed to persuade the people to make certain decisions, it would be necessary to engage an advisory organisation to help focus on particular aspects of information and give advice that the govoxier need help regarding. Peer-guides also involve situation where advisory-body may require making information request on sensitive matters existing at the seat of government from government bodies, and the rights of govoxiers to comply.

Govoxiers, by the very nature of their role, would show elements of sound good judgment to synthesise as much information from a wide range of sources. Unlike advisory organisations that only operate on the narrower field or narrow range of issues, like law, medicine, technology, or agriculture, but govoxiers often have to combine sources of research from two or more of any field before implying any conclusions derived from their own personal objective opinion on issues.

While the advice of govoxiers would normally consider multiple factors and then drawn advice based on how elements from the different fields could work together – such as some sector of citizens demanding for urban development in housing or education facilities, in the same region where a contingency plan to introduce an expansion of allocated lands for farming to increase agricultural output from that region has not yet been expressed to the citizenry-electorates because such plan is still in its risk assessment stage and incomplete and not wise at that stage in the process to be put forward to the regional electorates for consideration – may recourse the govoxiers to sometimes providing advice that may appear to be not directly expressed.

The advisory organisations, of course, know nothing about any contingency plan but would most readily provide competing advice to oppose the govoxier, for the electorates’ decision-making process to vote for the urban development to meet citizens demand in opposition to the advice of their govoxier advocating for non-urban development in that particular area within the region. This may force the govoxier to release its contingency plan to the electorates prematurely; which may results in divisive groups between those who already set their minds on urban-development and those who had been persuaded by the govoxiers to vote for farm-lands expansion, in the electorates’ decision-making elective-process

Govoxiers should be expected to be daily exposed to a variety of contingency legislative propositions to their regional electorates. The secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional Affairs is tasked to conduct research gatherings, derived nationally and internationally, and to engage intelligentsias from anywhere around the globe and encourage innovations and development of new policy complimentary toward the proposed society of innovation and experimentation of phenomena.

By subjecting govoxiers to such liabilities to be known for introducing innovative ideas and policies to their regional constituents for considerations, the electorates are made to make decisions and establish policies within their regions that continually drive innovative development to their regions and society at large. Whereas advisory board members are not govoxiers and would not have access to the govoxical contingency legislative liabilities as it is developing with the seats of government, and therefore could influence their service-users by providing risky advice on govoxical matters.

Shared-governance is the inevitable path for citizenry empowerment in human society in this current generation of ours. Its interdependent-leadership between the government and the governed is recognised to be the basic tenet of commicracy that turned out to be the most striking feature marking the current revelation-era the world over, and exerting significant influence this manifesto speaks for the proposed restoration-era of all Africa states.

On the one hand, the African-Union has demonstrated a state of common-unity of all African states and forged the social, economic and political cooperation of all African member states, which consequentially has laid the foundational requirement for a corporatist type structure capable of interlinking a commicratic future of the collective-individualism of African society collectively. On the other hand, with the existing independent-leadership that all African governments administering at the present time, the security threats of tribal or religious terrorism and its poor capacity to respond, biodiversity and ecosystem loss, energy crisis and low resilience to natural disasters, including the economic challenges facing African society collectively are becoming more common.

In particular, issues such as climate change and increasing water scarcity, border closures and immigration and police issues, financial crisis and interference with foreign Aids, impoverished medical facilities and the large-scale outbreak of infectious diseases, and cyber-crimes, have become ingrained as “African thing“, and should have routinely been fully addressed and recovered through the common governance of the African-Union.

Whereas in structure the African-Union has already equipped itself with what it takes to drive innovative developments to Africa that this manifesto speaks, but the forms of democracy, administration of politics and organisation mode of bureaucracy it appropriates to propel the structure and making the system works for African society, is lacking innovative and experimentation morale to align itself with global corporatism and usher in such development to Africa by merely introducing to the African people the regulatory-principle of government that empowers the citizens to define their own regional development across Africa, and for the government to do everything within its power to implement citizenry demands – step-by-step.

I say, the proposed transition of the African-Union into ethnopublicanism; of its member states into ethnopublican states, is recognised to be the striking feature of our shared future of one entity of all African states that the Pan-Africanism movement preached in its radical fight that mobilised Africans in the 1940s to fight for independent Africa from western colonial rule.

The proposed ethnopublicanism legal structure takes the proposed commicratic measures to ensure the ‘what’ and the ‘how’ the implementation of the transforming structure of all African states would be carried out from planning through to its completion. The proposed ethno-corporatist economic platform of ethnopublicanism proposed to resolve, by its mere operation, the challenges facing African society today including, but not limited to:

1. We are reduced to insufficient economic resource where a lot of Africans live in the condition of resource poverty because the structure of bureaucracy in governments fosters the promotion of corruption and the independence of the ‘ruling-class from the governed – for themselves and themselves alone;
2. The need to corrupt and be corrupted upholds the culture of individualism and the various mixed-form of governance that republicanism appropriates in the affairs of African states’ governments undermines both government and the role of citizens to foster economic empowerment of citizenry-society;
3. With the forms of governance degraded to subversion and then glorying in its undermined global integrity, has resulted in the political affair of state governments to become private properties of the ruling-class;
4. With the ruling-class now assumes ownership of state resources, the direct distribution of foreign Aids as the avenue to treat public funds as their elite’s group personal funding source, and the appropriation of state-owned natural-resources to keep reproducing excess economic resource in each of their contracting foreign donors’ countries from the toil of Africans’ worth, creates the dependency of African states to feel comfortable with the affairs of nurturing protégé society in favour of any development;
5. With African states nurturing protégé society, their exportation of outputs in natural-resources has to remain devaluated by the global market economy under the deposed global capitalist condition and remain to continues to be devaluated in value to speculations by the stock-markets, keeping African economy combined to only exists to serves the economic interests of their contracting foreign trading partners;
6. With devaluated economy comes currency devaluation, and with state governments’ dependency on the private-sector to sustain the economy independent of any altruistic support from the state; has been the driving force that propels African citizenry-society to since commits to inventing themselves by any means – to relying on sponsoring able-body and educated family member abroad with the pre-condition to sending money back home to sustain the rest of the family, to rely on creating businesses including on affairs of religion with the sale of hope and faiths by citizens and for citizens to sustain their common-unity in purpose regardless of the activity of government officials on affairs of the state, and to engage in civil wars when necessary for the social or economic survival of ethnic-groups against one another.

The problem of Africa seems to be anything but more of the ideological and structural context of state governing within which post-colonial Africans found themselves unable to fit in – because capitalism and republicanism are incompatible with the socialist character of Africans’ indigenous culture and idea of a civilised society. African value is a corporatist value since our ancient society. But since the imposition of the chattel-era to deposed our ancient society in Africa by the western societies, there had been too much civilisation of African society to adopting the western ways of social and economic life and thus depriving us the grace to implement anything of our own – with the colonial-era and the current political-era both of which emulates the ideological and structural state governing of western societies.  Revelation-age is in full swing in the global web-internetisation platform as part of the stabilisation of global corporatism, and thus influences the theory of this manifesto to propose for the transforming structure of the social and economic affairs of all African states into ethnopublicanism and ethno-corporatism.

I say to my fellow Africans, ethnopublicanism offer us to implement something of our own that has theoretically reproduced the systematic functions of the ideological and structural state governing of our ancient African-socialism, and it is compatible to align with the current web-internetisation of global corporatism. I asked a simple question: if our current state leaders in Africa are genuinely committed to advance African people both in the HomeLand and in the Diasporas to social and economic empowerment expressed in this manifesto, what have you all got to lose to dedicate a decade to implement as innovative experimentation the system of ethnopublicanism in Africa?

CHAPTER SIX

THE SOCIALIST FOUNDATION OF ETHNOPUBLICANISM

Ethnopublican is a socialist state constitutionally dedicated to the establishment of ethnosocialism. Ethnosocialism is an economic theory of citizenry organisation of a govoxical system of government. It states that the means of economic production should be owned by the state, that the distribution of wealth should be non-monetary based on useful-values of services in interchange for use-values of economic needs and wants, and that the govoxical system of government is a non-party system, operates on a commicratic organisational-mode, and it’s an interdependent-leadership organisation where the state services are regulated by govoxiers in collaborative elective-process of decision-making by the citizenry-electorates, and that the legislative-power of decision-making and the day-to-day administration of government and state-centred decisions on affairs of the state are placed in the control and direction of the citizenry-electorates. This means that ethnopublicanism of ethnosocialist society operates on the economic system of a moneyless form of resource accounting on goods and services, and the working-group provides the labour and economic services for the benefits of citizenry-society collectively. This is the definition of the socialist foundation of the ethnopublicanism.

The core of the socialist foundation of the ethnopublican state is the commitment towards the expression of collective-individualism in human society. Collective-individualism, I defined as a form of socio-culture based in the collective interest of a group to act in the interest of individuals within the group; a group of individuals that take it as a personal duty to conduct themselves in altruist-relations with one another towards a common-purpose to achieve the needs of each member of the group by common-design.

The concept of collective-individualism is the ethical conduct of the theory of commicratic organisation, and it’s about an individual to join a group and be trained or be fitted to rise in shared capacity and recognition with each member of the group; it requires each individual within the group to remain duty-bound to advance the interests of every member of the group; it’s about individual taking credit for each contribution that it made within the group, and not for the group to take credit for individual contribution as a collective; it’s also about the existence of a group based in collaboration to advance the ambition of each interdependent member of the group in the collective interests of each member of the group.

Collective-individualism is the ethical conducts that hallmark our internetisation global world and it began from the altruistic act of a single individual – Timothy John Berners-lee, a British computer scientist. When Sir-Timothy coincidentally developed the World-Wide-Web, the acronym “www” for short, in 1989 in his office proposal for an information management system for researchers while working at CERN as a software engineer – the large particle physics laboratory near Geneva, Switzerland, his work-place bureaucracy first raised its conflict against innovation or experimentation, in opposition to the proposal through one of his boss at the time by the name Mike Sendall, who rejected the proposal as a write-off to what he described as, on quote: “vague but exciting” on the cover of the proposal file. But Mike Sendall then did something remarkable; he showed humanism – the welfare of altruism – and allowed Tim to use his time to work on his innovation in September 1990, and it was later accepted. In 1991, the new web community was given the grace of the world-wide-web internetisation platform and it developed rapidly to what it is today.

Having recognised the true potential of world-wide-web as a social platform, Tim and others advocated to CERN to making its underlying code available to human society anywhere and everywhere on a royal-free basis, forever – not to be monetised; to commit it to decentralisation that requires no permission needed from any central authority to post anything on the web by anyone from anywhere; to be based on non-discrimination that must treat all internet communication equally and not to charge differently based on user, their content, website, platform, application, type of equipment, source address, destination address or method of communication based on the principle of equity also known as Net-Neutrality; bottom-up design that placed intellectual resource developed by any experts or written by anyone to operate on the web platform to must remain freely available to everybody, in encouraging maximum innovation and experimentation on improvements and advances; to be of universality of diversity that allow the publication of anything on the web regardless of beliefs, culture, and for all computers involve to aligning and integrating for any type device to connect and interact through the web to any other time device without constraints or limitation – such as mobile phone device to laptop or to iPod or to TV, etc; and that, there must be consensus for universal standards that every web user had to agree to use them to achieve their purpose freely and with no constraints that gives everyone the freedom of a say in creating the standards.

All these are adverse to capitalist customary operations that monetised and privatised everything and anything, with its bureaucratic organisational culture and its position of enforcing class-system and class collaborations in human society where it exercises dominion. This single act of altruism by Sir-Tim and his team in 1991 unleashed a global wave of internetisation creativity never seen before in human society.

Global corporatist society took shape; royal free policy became the norms and standard of internetisation apparatus; producing revolutionary ideas that define the computer-intelligence technology platform we find ourselves today in the 21st century. GNU created by Richard Stallman in 1983, an American software programmer, as a project to create a completely free operating system is now a major distributor of free software on the internet platform freely available to anyone from anywhere around the globe; there is also Linus Torvalds, a Finnish software engineer created our beloved Linux free operating system, and then we have the English developer Mike Little and Matt Mullenweg the American developer both of which are the founders of that outstanding free open source WordPress.org and all the software and plugins developed to work for WordPress sites are open-source and freely available to anyone to use and amend and innovate for their use as they so desire; and even Microsoft, too, is contributing to our open source web-internetisation platforms and we are still encouraging it to do more and give it all up, and many thousands of others.

The fusionistic digital world of web-internetisation encourages people to constantly requesting for new online features, and the more proficient the web-developers becoming in constantly striving to meet demands and the needs of every request. And by that, our growth in fortifying the walls around the economic platform of global corporatist society becomes inevitable.

Everywhere we looked, we see web-corporate groups such as Amazon, eBay, Google, Alibaba, WordPress, YouTube, Quora, and many more from all works of life and industries we could think of, are constantly innovating and creating platforms with an increased global community of everything and anything, and inviting people to create online businesses through them and earn their income, and to relying on internet platforms for our daily entertainments and leisure – creating a wide range of combinations of collective-individuals in altruist relationships and interactions with one another.

It is now a reality, too much so in fact, to share the same online individualistic personality with the collectives of others with a shared sense of morality and life philosophy, people we’ve never met and would never meet in person in our lifetime but are only known to us through the web-world we are all exposed to daily. We engaged in interdependent relationships with one another through meaningful interactions on the same online platforms and web-based groups. Gone are the generations when human interactions are made only on the streets and people everywhere are restricted to shared-experience within their locality around their place of abode. But in our generation we made shared-experience in greater numbers with people we have shared commonalities across national boundaries to engage in direct interactions on internet platforms, and meeting in person has become secondary or something we are obliged to do resulting from first meeting online and getting to know one another sufficiently which is primary.

The practice of bureaucracy that has been the administrative organisational expression of capitalism, as Tim’s manager Mike Sendall had first demonstrated against world-wide-web when he wrote it off as “vague but exciting“, compelled bureaucrats to rely heavily on procedures that worked well in the past, creating conflicts with innovations and deprived human nature of the energy to advance beyond the reach of its organisation. The theory of commicracy, on the other hand, has been developed from the resulting administrative organisational expression of our current generation web-internetisation socio-culture I identified as global corporatism – where every web participants regardless of where they live or what beliefs or culture they practice are part of the controller of the large interest group of computer-intelligence web-internetisation movement – and it compelled each one of us to rely heavily on experimentation and innovation, creating conflicts with the bureaucratic expression that is depriving us of our human freedom and stifling our human nature of its authenticity to advance beyond our society’ reach and also hindering our progress to break completely free from capitalist work-ethics.

Whilst the tide of monetary-economy the world over is restraining the progress of every web-developer at every turns, and it has resulted in the all-embracing platform of our crypto virtual currency to mitigate against the tide of capitalist fiat monies that it left behind, so we would not be burden by the daily need for money and we could devote our time to continue to advance in fortifying the walls of web-internetisation in our pursuit of global corporatism.

Indeed, the theory of collective-individualism which has been the ethical conducts that hallmark our web-internetisation global world, as shown in the free open source networking that defines the developing commitment of our generation to advance the computer-intelligence technological platform beyond and beyond, has its origin in the development of the world-wide-web. According to Sir-Tim, he said, and on quote: “Most of the technology involved in the web, like the hypertext, like the internet, multi-font text objects, had all been designed already. I just had to put them together“. Indeed, we know Vannevar Bush (1890-1974) developed the hypertext since 1945; we also know that computer scientists Vinton Cerf and Bon Kahn are credited with inventing the Internet communication protocols we use today we referred to as the Internet since 1980; Frederic Goudy was said to have created iconic fonts that are still in use today since the 1920s.

As it is already been made clear, collective-individualism gives credit to the individual but required the collaborative support of every member of the group to achieve its purpose. While Sir-Tim is duly credited for having created the world-wide-web, but the web-internetisation platform would not have been possible without the apparent contribution of Vannevar Bush, Vinton Cerf and Bon Kahn, and Frederic Goudy – who was the first recorded full-time type designer of iconic fonts. This is to show that collective-individualism gives credit to individuals’ achievements whilst giving recognition to the group as a collective that made individual’s achievement possible.

The ethical-conducts of collective-individualism that has been the operational expression of global corporatism is not only deflating capitalist’ individualistic operation in human society the world over, but it has also resulted in directing the principles and dynamics of our human society socio-culture. Our generation is the proud institution of open networking in human society regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or religion even – open information of data making contents open if anyone is free to use, re-use or redistribute them; open access of research material outputs from any academic or educational field freely available and distributed online without monetary cost or other bureaucratic access barriers; open government that is mitigating against the bureaucratic operation of political-autocracy where citizens in any country are now gaining the right of access to government-held information and proceedings to allow for effective public scrutiny and oversight on the day-to-day administration of government, with great emphasis on transparency and government accountability against corruption and self-interests; free culture movement in the promotion of freedom to distribute and modify the creative works of others as free content or open content without compensation to, or the consent of, the work’s original creators, by using the internet and other forms of media, with emphasis to mitigate against the bureaucratic culture of over-restrictive copyright laws that is conflicting with advances of our global corporatist society. This is the socio-culture that the theory of ethnosocialism promotes in the creation of ethnopublicanism and ethno-corporatism.

The ethnopublican form of ethnosocialism is a system where the citizenry-electorates direct the economy and social affairs of their society. It combined state-ownership and citizenry management of the means of production with centralised command-economy depended upon an engaged and participatory citizenry-electorates to make economic decisions regarding the manufacturing and the distribution of products and services. This system is directed to results in levelling the gap between economic-classes in society, with the state to meets the needs of the incapacitated and non-working group, while the working-group agree to provide their useful-value labour-power to the economic activities of the state.

In ethnosocialist’s ethnopublican nationalism-structure, government organisation is arranged into an interdependent-leadership organisation dependent upon citizenry-electorates, and the economy is radically transformed through citizenry-prescribed laws and guidelines for populocracy so that individual citizens can take part in the day-to-day administration of government and state-centred decisions that affect them individually and as a collective.

In this theory, ethnosocialism is a socialist society for both ethno-corporatism and ethnopublicanism, with a non-monetary economy, no economic-classes, the existence of a state and equalism relations between social groups. It also believes that both the ethno-corporatist economy and ethnopublican society should be run under the proposed system of populocracy – to sustain the non-monetary economy and meet human needs collectively in society.

The theory of ethnosocialism is a hard-line of the theory of socialism, and with it, the all hitherto economic systems like capitalism, and the governmental system of politics would be completely withdrawn from its society. In an ethnosocialist society, all industries would be state-owned and regulated by the government; the government would establish services such as education, health-care, public transportation services, housing, and would provide the working-group with full access to all state-owned resources to establish industrial services to compete with state-owned establishments on quality of goods and services to citizenry-society as their only consumers.

Indeed, the theory of ethnosocialism is derived from the economic and governmental system of socialism, and ethno-corporatism would treat people altruistically to such existential conditions that would eventually influence a new existence into being that would culminate human society into a certain hybrid society – operating in a mixed form of govoxical society and a multi-functional stateless society of some description.

The levelling of the economic-class that overrides the existence of the monetary-economy in an ethno-corporatist society is the bridge on a path to the predicted hybrid-society. However, whilst I do not dispute the theory of communism’s prediction of an eventual classless-society, but I do not think a human society could function with no need of a state or any form of government at this stage in our human history.

Even the certain condition of a hybrid-society that has been predicted here would require a certain level of culminated advances in artificial-intelligence technology – and the technological advances in our generation have not advanced to the level required to achieve such a social reality. And with the existential condition of human social life in an eventual classless-society, remain overwhelming to the senses trying to imagine it, I must confess – because it would require every human individual on earth to be remotely connected to a central hub of some description situated in space; this central hub would appear to be a simple technology that would not require maintenance of some description, and the planet-sun would play a major role in its operation.

Hypothetically, there would be an AI-gadgetry device that would be made mandatory for every human from birth to have installed inside their person throughout life, the size of a wristwatch battery, which would connect each individual to this central-hub network situated in space hovering above our planet earth. When the AI-gadgetry is installed, it would be designed to be impossible to remove it from the person until after death.

With this AI-gadgetry firmly installed in place, it would serve all purpose including self and social security; emergency self-activating mechanism with voice and instinctive reflex of some description that would alert other people within some pre-programmed miles radius that an individual in a specific location requires urgent attention or help; reflexive automatic medical diagnosis and treatment prescription to the bearer, and the only way a human can socialise anyhow – in terms of one direct access to human needs anywhere and everywhere including the use of public services which is not owned by anyone but jointly maintained by regional residents; the pre-installed access to an advanced form of mobile phone as we know it and the new mobile phone device would not require one to carry around with them an object device as we do at the present – and the mobile phone interface would operate like a morph of some description without physical object and with no materially-made mobile phone device or laptop or any computerised device of any kind other than one’s hand gesture to operate the morph-screen and communicate remotely on calls with another; where each gadgetry in every human would verify the existence of the next person’s gadgetry walking on the street – a sort of a universal passing-contact verification of some description; and each AI-gadgetry acts as one of collective digital-force that sustains the existence of the others, and recyclable through and within either paternal or maternal side of families only – with an imprinted unique marker identification that associate individuals only to their family line in which one have had installed in them since birth, and a lot more.

This is to show, hypothetically, that the existential conditions of a classless-society would require such a universal AI-gadgetry described above, and it would produce such omnipresent and all-embracing moral behaviour in human-nature that would appear as natural, standard, moral, ethical, or as resulting from self-evident common-interest of human-society. Ethno-socialism is a stage of a classless-society. In fact, it is the highest stage of socialism, and this point to the inevitability of a form of hybrid-society.

To arrive at the condition of a hybrid-society expressed here, human society would first have to live through the challenge of the existential conditions of non-monetary society successfully – because ethnosocialist society inherently leads to a classless society through a hybrid-society – and the collective advances in computer-intelligence technology would deliver our future generations to its advanced form of a classless-society. I say, any state government that preoccupied its society with money is a government that has deprived human-nature of the energy to advance beyond the reach of its society, but a society with no money to nurture is a society that has given human-nature the freedom and with excess energy to continue to mature its society to a new advance world. But to which side shall we incline?

A socialist ethnopublic or ethnosocialist state is a citizenry-control state or citizenry ethnopublican society dedicated to the establishment of a non-monetary economy and the division of citizenry-society into social-groups – because the existential conditions of the social groups would serve an integrative fundamental purpose in the first stage of the predicted hybrid-classless society.

The term ethnonationalism has been used to refer to a nation or nationality defined in terms of ethnicity, with emphasis on common ethnic ancestry. I used the term ethnosocialism to describe a citizenry-control society defined by their geographical territory, with emphasis on common socio-economical interests. As a result, ethnosocialist society is not defined by ethnicity, race or religion, but by the common socio-economical interests of members of its society.

The idea of ethnonationalism stems from the classification of indigenous inhabitants defined by geographic territory on the notion that they transcend from common racial ancestry and function as an ethnic group. The descendants of the early human ethno-migration from Africa to different parts of the world since the stone-age era, that had gone on to form the diverse ethno-nationalism interspersed in different geographic locations around the globe and thus giving us the simplistic idea of a nation functioning as ethno-states of nationalism-culture based on race alone – the diverse ethno-race of Asian Mongoloid, European Caucasoid, African Negroid, Australoid, and such like, established different methods of state-centred socio-economic systems and cultural existence of their own.

This has meant that each race now sees itself as a permanent feature of a geographic territory or simply a specific location that a race-group develops by nature naturally. Whereas the differences in environmental conditions around the globe had played a part in the matrix of our skin-colour and physical features as indicative of our race after ethno-migration from Africa. The leading scientific evidence we have as of today claims that all early humans are of dark-skinned colour and presumably originates from a uniform socio-culture and condition of life; the question is asked, how should we address and give recognition to the theory of ethnosocialism in our modern 21st century that emphasises common-unity of socio-economical interests above race, ethnicity and religion?

I say, a socialist ethnopublican state is a non-party populocracy governed by elected officials who regulate the affairs of the state on the system of organisation of leadership interdependency upon citizenry-electorates. As a result, the govoxical system of government and the commicratic organisational-mode of the state are both distinctively structured to pursue the development of ethnosocialism: the roles of the working-group in the organisation of the ethno-corporatist economy, the roles of the govoxiers in the organisation of the state governmental commicracy, and the roles of the citizenry collectively in the socio-culture of govoxical populocracy, are developments towards the maintenance of ethnosocialism.

Ideally, the development of the proposed African state ethno-corporatist economy with citizenry-controlled of its economic resource production and its consumption with the long-term goal of building up the whole of African productive forces would influence and produce such altruistic behaviour to meet human needs regardless of race, religion or ethnicity, and to extends to all African Diasporas as well, and all of which would simultaneously find within its interests in promoting world ethnosocialism based on socio-economical interests of the world society under a single global common-unity.

Stages in the development of citizenry-centred commicratic agencies

In an ethno-corporatist society, all utilities would be state-owned and govoxically-operated under governmental administration. The proposed citizenry-centred commicratic agencies would be responsible for delivery of the wide range of public utilities to members of African society and also would regulate the non-monetary services to the public, including maintenance of policy under its executive secretariat-ministries. The govoxical explanation for the need to create citizenry-centred commicratic agencies is that they are state-owned institutions in which the technology of production, distribution, and provision are entirely non-monetary – that they are, in a phrase, would operate on a condition that does not require money to exchange hands for goods and services nationally across Africa.

The proposed corporatist economic revolution in Africa arises from the ethno-corporatist essential prerequisite to eradicate poverty and class system in the lives of the African people. From the Africans sufficient human resource labour-power with full capacity for the corposense required; to the elasticity of demand and provision that is expected to operating under the particular conditions of resource interchange of ethno-corporatist trade-economy, including the considerations of the excess capacity necessary for meeting citizenry demand in African society at the governmental level to achieve the proprietorship of intellectual properties and franchise of foreign products and services to be produced and consumed on the ground in Africa, and more like, Africa will rise to the challenges of our fusionistic digital world and takes its rightful place as the largest global powerhouse of material resource production to the rest of the world.

It is indeed the case that the proposed operation of a commicratic system to distribute state provisions for meeting citizenry demands of all economic production of goods and services – of housing and foods provisions, for example – would be ordinarily non-monetary, solely for individual use-values, and comforts in life’s pleasures. Given the predilection of this manifesto to the non-monetary economy and its proposed moneyless form of resource accounting practices at the national level, the proposed citizenry-centred commicratic agencies would apply to all economic industries instituted on the ground in Africa.

This manifesto has also satisfactorily resolved the condition of the African economy to operate on a monetary economic condition in trade with our foreign trading partners. This is a necessary measure required to build African economy and maintain a strong economic relation with our foreign trading partners around the world, where economic activities at the national level would have effects that can also be valued in monetary terms and thus improved our trading affairs and inform external policies in the exercise of their monetary accounting in their trading relation with Africa.

This would also have the effect of mitigating against those certain subjective influence of external policies that may attempt to impact on African trading affairs and thus routinely sidelines any alien ambition that may attempt to place African economy in that condition of poor valuation leading to currency devaluation as we had suffered by it in the protégé economic condition. African monetary value with international trading partners would no longer be subject to devaluation to serve the interests of others.

I say, our exports would no longer be subject to such qualitative value in competition in the global exchange. The proposed stock-trading economic transaction with foreign trading partners would be based on a system of resource-trade-interchange under the proposed corporatist policy of trade-economy, and we would no longer commit our resources to be traded in exports under the old condition of the capitalist policy of market-economy.

At the national level, though, citizenry-centred commicratic agencies’ are permanent features of ethnopublican state and their main purpose would be to regulate the national utility provisions across regions in Africa., to meeting the direct demands of all who apply for and are primarily qualified for its services, such as the working-group, the pensioners, the disabled or those incapacity to work, including those who are below the working-age group – and other applicable regulations between the non-working group such as foreigners and non-residents, and those who chose not to engage in work activities by choice. All regional counties would have citizenry-centred commicratic regulatory offices, and the secretariat-ministries would serve as their combined service-delivery governmental commicratic regulatory agencies in each region across Africa.

The Commission, as they each would be known by, are govoxical commissioning bodies, operating at the regional level, created to perform service-delivery of public utility function to the public, in response to the operational non-monetary economy at the national level. The Commissions jointly perform Legislative, Judicial, Economy, and Executive functions administratively for the govoxical government, and they are a permanent feature in an ethno-socialist society.

In an ethnopublican state, the Commissions are used primarily for the non-monetary service-delivery to the public and are distinguished according to each of their terms of departmental commissioning appointment. The Commissions are appointed as the administrative body at the regional level when any of the branches of government require them, and they depend on the government department concerned. However, regardless of the government department that a Commission administratively performs public utility service for and on its behalf, Commissions are permanent extensions to the executive-arm of government and thus receives each of their executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry associated with their service delivery.

Commissions are primarily employed by both the economy-branch of government and the citizenry-branch of government, because their service-delivery functions are institutionally performed by the legislative committees – between the economic-unionists who represent the citizenry working-group from each economic industry, and the citizenry-committees who represent the citizenry-electorates from each regional county – to exercise direct control over the delivery of their own prescribed policies as the legislative power-holder of the state in an ethnopublican society.

In Africa, the Commissions would be charged to exercise the execution and enforcement of rules and regulations. They would be vested with regulatory powers associated with each of the commissioning governmental department that appoints them, and they would be known as regulatory commissioning agencies for the government. As it would become clear, the official procedure for staffing Chief Commissioners – the head of commissioning agencies, regardless of which of the branches of government appoints the commission agency to perform its service-delivery at the regional level to the people, is mixed – between the regional citizenry-electorates and the regional office of Lord-Governors. The system of rules governing the affairs of secretariat-ministry associated with a Commission would routinely dictate the executive operational directives of the Commission, such as the limits of its regulatory-guidelines to exercise the execution and enforcement of rules and regulations over the region it exercises governance including the terms of its staffing procedures.

The Law-Commission, for example, receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of HomeLand-Affairs, but its diplomatic protocol placed the office of the regional Lord-Governors with the power to staff its Chief-Commissioners of Justice. As mentioned earlier, that the offices of regional Lord-Governors and Lord-Counsellors are part of the Judicial-branch of government and are regulated by their respective StateLord’s office.

Whilst the office of StateLords are not part of the administrative-arm of government with no influence over the day-to-day operation of the Administration of government where the Secretariats, Economy and Citizenry occupies, but they have both their regulatory offices of the Lord-Governors and the Lord-Counsellors to maintain the sanctity of the instruments of the judiciary at regional level in an ethnopublican state.

However, while the Lord-Governors and Lord-Counsellors are elected to government office by the citizenry-electorates just like the office of the StateLords, but the office of the Lord-Governor is granted the state power to staff its regional Law-Commissioner of Justice, Palaver-court judges, the electoral and boundaries commissioners, and any other commissioning office that carry out the service delivery associated with the administration of the Law within its region.

Likewise, the Basic utility Commissioners are staffed by their regional citizenry-electorates through an elective-process and receive each of their executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Technology & Science Research and Environment & Public Health, but the Commission is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister.

The Education and Apprenticeship commissioners are staffed by the citizenry-electorates through an elective-process, and it is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but the Commission receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Education & Apprenticeship. This is to show the system of rules governing the affairs of the regulatory agencies – between the legislative committees and the service-delivery directorates of the judiciary.

Hereto, I submit sixteen (16) citizenry-centred commicratic agencies as a starting step in the development of African ethno-socialism, and I raise the social structure of populocracy to guide the ethno-corporatist economic system and its associated non-monetary economy. My expression purpose to show an ideal ethno-socialist framework, the proposed theory of ethno-socialism that is highly futuristic, in line with thinking to express our aspiration to seek a more Afro-centric economic model and to recreate our ancient African-socialism in Africa. All the Commission offices are situated in each regional county and their activity is supervised by the office of Lord-Governors for that region, and each Commission is headed by either the regional citizenry-committee or economic-unionist member for that region:

The Ideal Formation of Citizenry-Centred Commicratic Agencies

CITIZENRY-BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT	ECONOMY-BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT
Electoral & Boundaries Commission	Work & Pension Commission
Housing Commission	Health & Social-Care Commission
Royal Commission	Road-Transport Commission
Citizens Advice Commission	Education & Apprenticeship Commission
Culture & Tourism Commission	Environment & Public Health Commission
Identity & Social-Welfare Commission	Agricultural & Farming Commission
Census & National Statistical Commission	International-Travel Commission
Law & Human Rights Commission	Basic Utilities Commission

CITIZENRY-BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

ELECTORAL & BOUNDARIES COMMISSION

• Electoral & Boundaries Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for conducting and supervising citizenry elective-process, to any elective government office, as govoxiers, and established by the Constitution, including all other elections as directed by the House-of-StateLords Assembly.

• It is headed by its located regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of HomeLand Affairs.
• Its mandate includes the continuous registration of voters and revision of the voter’s roll, the fixing of the boundary line and demarcation of the regional borderline of constituencies and wards, the regulation of individual candidates process, the settlement of electoral disputes, the registration of candidates for elections, to conduct the bi-weekly citizenry legislative voting exercise, voter education, the facilitation of the observation, monitoring and evaluation of elections; the regulation of resources used by each candidate regarding any election, the prescription and enforcement of codes-of-conduct for candidates, as directed under the citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines, including the monitoring of compliance with legislation on the nomination of candidates by citizenry-electorates.
• The Electoral & Boundaries Commission in each regional boundary comprises of staffed commissioners appointed by the office of Lord-Governors and confirmed by the office of their respective prime-minister, and a Commission’s secretary appointed by the regional citizenry-electorates.

HOUSING COMMISSION

• Housing Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for the tenure management of the proposed national housing provisions, industrial buildings, and trade centres to residents within their regions and their maintenance.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Housing.
• All housing owned by the State would be subject to management under this Commission through administrative measures of housing need as a condition of human basic necessity in an ethnopublican state. This Commission primarily provides the remedy for housing inequality, and other criteria of allocation for individuals to gain certain housing would vary within different contexts.

ROYAL COMMISSION

• Royal Commission department is dedicated to the office of Head-of-State (crown ethnopublic), and their offices are located at each regional counties across African states to conduct functions of commission of enquiry on matters of great importance and usually controversial cases made against the integrity or character of a govoxier in public office.
• The proposed 14 joint-head of the Royal-Commissions, who are also the appointed Speakers of the House-of-StateLords Assembly, are appointed through citizenry elective-process, supervised by the citizenry-branch of government, and receive the constitutional power of their joint-office to adjudicate cases in the name of the crown directly from the office of Head-of-State; with considerable powers to subpoenaing witnesses – the govoxiers, secretary-of-state, even the StateLords – taking evidence under oath and requesting documents in the name of the office of the crown.
• The Commission is similar in function to the palaver-system where citizens disputes are heard and judged under citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines as interpreted and directed by the office of StateLords. But the function of the Commission is restricted to the terms of reference of the Commission to hear cases like those of a judge and only arbitrate issues involving govoxiers in state-office, including the handling of complaints about judicial conduct, such as with judges or lawderlies.
• The function of the Royal Commission exercise duties on behalf of the crown to adjudicate legal disputes between govoxiers and commicrats in state office, and to carry out the administration of justice under the proposed Crown constitutional Codes-of-Mandate (COM) in the HomeLand. The Royal Commission is to determine disputes of cases brought before them in the name of the crown. It is effectively a separate court-system specifically for those in a government office in an ethnopublican state.
• However, it should be mentioned that in cases involving a StateLord in state-office and the StateLord also was the acting Head-of-State, the person-concerned would be subject to answer to the Royal Commission as a StateLord and in StateLord capacity, and not as of Head-of-State. As a result, any rulings of the Commission made against the person-concerned are binding and enforceable in the name of the crown.
• The 14 joint-head of the Royal-Commissions, who are also the appointed Speakers of the House-of-StateLords Assembly, acts in matters or affairs of the state which would otherwise require the Crown’s attendance. These include the opening and prorogation of the House-of-StateLords’ Assembly, the announcement of a newly elected govoxier in a government office, and such like.

CITIZENS-ADVICE COMMISSION

• Citizens-Advice Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for the confidential and advice to assist individuals with legal matters, family matters, disability and social-care welfare entitlements, bereavement, and more like. The Commission provide advice services to people to resolve or come to terms with the problem they faced, including information about travelling abroad for any purpose and to provide informed-knowledge, and to direct people to specialist expert advice to improve individual decision-making on any matters – such as the voting of a candidate into a government office or individual decisions relating to the govoxical monthly voting exercise on the administration of government.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Govoxical and Constitutional affairs.
• This Commission works to improve the policies and principles that shape individual citizenry-electorate’s decision-making process that affects people’s lives. They work to formalise the character of doubts or confusions in individuals to help them with their problems designed to resolve social or personal problems arising from within their community, or that may otherwise affect their community in any way.

CULTURE & TOURISM COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for cultural matters, tourism activity to visitors, and creative arts.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Culture and Tourism.
• This Commission is tasked to activity in which tourists to Africa are essentially looked after and motivated to learn, discover, and experience cultural attractions and products existing on the ground within their immediate localities, such as historical and cultural heritage sites, modern urban districts and creative industries, ethnic-pockets of town and their value system, including their historical beliefs and traditions from the ancient times.

IDENTITY & SOCIAL-WELFARE COMMISSION

• Identity and social-welfare Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for the provision of economic welfare to regional residents through the proposed African Provision Number (APN) identification chip card reader to all African citizens. It is specifically a social insurance provision to African citizens, and also must provide social assistance to non-residents and visitors who found themselves in need of emergency provisional assistance whilst in Africa.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of HomeLand Affairs, to be responsible for the basic health, education and welfare of everyone within their regional boundary and to provide a range of social services provision as it deems necessary.
• This Commission is tasked to must prevent food and housing poverty, and poverty in an ethno-corporatist society must be judged in the light of actual access to basic human needs in Africa. This Commission is located in all regional boundaries across Africa to be responsible for the social welfare provision of all residents within each of their region, to the exception of no other. Social-welfare provisions and services are typically provided at the expense of the working-group and expressly available when individuals engage directly with this Commission within their constituencies.
• The Commission would operate community and social centres, emergency housing and food banks, including comprehensive provisional assistance, especially to those working-age groups who chose not to engage in a work activity out of their own personal volition or choice, and also emergency provisional assistance to provide support based on need alone to stranded foreigners or visitors who can no longer support themselves to meet basic needs until pending their return to their home country.
• The support provision provides by this Commission is synonymous with the support provision provided by other commissions – such as the vocational training provided by the education and apprenticeship commission, the support provided to stranded-tourists by the tourism commission, work and pension commission, health and social-care Commission, and housing Commission – intended to ensure that individuals, regardless of their immigration status or circumstance, can meet basic human needs in Africa.

CENSUS & NATIONAL STATISTICAL COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for the organisation of the African statistical system, such as the collection of statistical data and official population census for social and economic management and planning.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of HomeLand Affairs.
• This Commission is tasked with its regional population census and statistical information of social and economic activities, regionally and nationally, including current international activities relative to Africa.
• This Commission is tasked with specific-purpose statistics for dedicated use to various government departments and provides the support to its service-users to fulfil its responsibilities on statistical matters. It is also responsible for the publication of statistical data and its analytical results, including consultation and support services to citizens.

LAW & HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred commicratic agency responsible for promoting judicial governance under the Rule-of-Law in accordance with regional citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines. The palaver-system is the service-arm of this Commission, and it supports it administratively in the administration of justice to the people.
• It is headed by its regional citizenry-committee and regulated by the citizenry-branch of government under the incumbency office of the citizenry-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of HomeLand Affairs.
• The Commission oversees the administration of immigration-law, civil-law, criminal-law, employment-law, family-law, and the institution of the Lawderly, within its region, where citizens are statutory regulated by the institution of the Lawderly, and disputes are heard and judged at the palaver-courts in accordance to citizenry prescribed codes-of-conduct as interpreted and directed by the office of StateLords. In practice, this commission exercise jurisdiction over the Palaver-courts and the Lawderly operating within its region, and its’ the service-delivery commissioning agency for both the secretariat-ministries of Defence & HomeLand Security and the HomeLand-Affairs.
• This Commission is tasked with the role of the highest court-of-appeal in each State. It operates a separate administration of justice from the palaver-court, and it is headed by regional Lord-Governor’s appointed Chief Commissioners for Justice in each region. It regulates the judiciary, the administration of justice and hearing appeal cases advanced from within its region to state-level.
• However, there is a higher-court jurisdiction, independent from this Commission, that hear appeal cases of the failure of this Commission at the state-level brought to it from all African states, and supervised by the office of the StateLords.

ECONOMY-BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT

WORK & PENSION COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for the delivery of workers and pensions welfare, and performing the service-delivery of citizenry prescribed policy.
• It is also responsible for monitoring how the work and pension system was developing over time within their respective regions and for making recommendations to the secretariat-ministry of labour and industry on how the direction of the national pension age-band impacts the social and economic activity within its region.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Labour and Industry.
• The Commission is responsible for the administration of work-related organisations: Vocational training centres, Job-centres, and Disability and social-welfare for the working-age group, and Pension and welfare provisions for those above the working-age.
• This commission aims to provide the full maximum benefits that ethno-corporatism could offer to the working-group – for the working-group to have direct access to all goods and services existing on the ground in Africa, to engage in activities and schemes that would meet their direct use-values as their individual selves so desire, including prioritising to meets the threshold for foreign travel for any purpose in equal measures, and the benefits continue to apply throughout their pension age. 

HEALTH & SOCIAL-CARE COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for the delivery of health and social care facilities within its region, and reviewing patients’ complaint about HHP – ‘HomeLand Healthcare Provision’ services operating within its region. It is responsible for the policy delivery of hospitals, dental and general practices and other care services within its region, to provide people with safe, effective and high-quality care, and to encourage providers to improve. It protects the interests of people whose rights have been restricted under the mental-health provision.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Health & Social-Care.
• It is responsible for investigating serious failures in health care services, and publishing information about the state of health care operations within its region. It is also responsible for assessing the management, provision and quality of HHP healthcare and social care services, and regulating the health care facilities through inspection, monitoring complaints and enforcement activities, including the promotion of reviews and assessments carried out by the Commission and also that of the secretariat-ministry of Health and social-care.
• This Commission is tasked with promoting improvements of health services and social-care facilities operating within its region and to use views of patients and users of health care services and robust data sources for its arm-length monitoring of clinical performance. It also aimed to help people to make better-informed decisions about their care, promote the sharing of information and give clearer expectations on the standard of performance provision.
• The Commission provides services health screening programs such as cancer screening, STD checks, and more. It works to reduce health inequalities by operating local health centres focusing specifically on substance misuse treatment services support and alcohol and drugs substance misuse treatment, including health promotion such as healthy diet and anti-smoking treatment and major incidence emergency response.

ROAD-TRANSPORT COMMISSION

• The Road-Transport Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for the maintenance and operational delivery of the proposed Ropodium autonomous road-transport vehicle, rail and mono-modal transport, and logistics centres in operation within its region.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Transport & Innovation.
• The proposed autonomous Ropodium carrier transportation would be localised in specific numbers and maintained within regions. Its maintenance and regulatory responsibilities would be restricted within regional boundaries and local road-transport Commissions. This, I deduced, would allow regional remote operators to have control over consistent regulation and maintenances of Ropodiums and its roads, creating efficient and quality transportation service regions by regions.
• This Commission would be focused on reforms that improve the productivity, safety and environmental outcomes of the proposed African road transport system overall. It would rely on the development of road-transport regulatory policies and guidelines to be made by citizenry-electorates, such as performance-based standards and heavy-Ropodium vehicle access routes and determination of off-peak hours different within regions.
• The Commission implements rules and regulations submitted to it from the secretariat-ministry of Transport and ensure outcomes are relevant and effective within its region. It also would coordinate, monitoring, evaluating and maintaining the secretariat implementation of StateLords approved reforms.

EDUCATION & APPRENTICESHIP COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for coordinating apprenticeship within its region and enabling people of all ages to enter the skilled trades – placing much more focus on apprenticeships and career or vocational education that prepares people to work or take up employment in skilled craft or trade as trades persons.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Education & Apprenticeship.
• The Commission would operate job-sites training centres and online training courses making learning various trade skills and soft skills easier for its service-users within its region, for anyone with such interest in learning trade skills and trade theory from educational instructors and established professions.
• This Commission conducts research and feedback to the secretariat, and it regulates areas on how to place the skills needs of industries across regions at the centre of skills surplus within its region. It invests resources in regional skills development in preventing unemployment amongst the working-age within its region, in line with promoting economic growth in Africa.

ENVIRONMENT & PUBLIC HEALTH COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for the delivery of environmental policies and environmental protection measures, and coordination of environmental and public health within its region, including sustainable development and cross-regional measures and agreements aimed at protecting the environment.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Environment & Public-Health.
• It is tasked to conduct research and intervention programmes and provisions of reliable information to residents within its region and to professionals working in health care about infectious diseases, the environment, nutrition and safety, including restoration of environmental damage, civil protection, food safety issues, health aspects of bioterrorism, pharmaceutical and cosmetic products, programmes and specific actions in public health sector, the labelling and safety of foodstuffs, veterinary protection against risks to human health, public health checks on foodstuffs and environmental hazards, and more like.
• The Commission conducts research on climate-change within its regions, such as air quality, soil and water pollution. It is also responsible for waste management and recycling, and safe dispositions of dangerous substances and preparations, neighbourhood noise levels, and protecting biodiversity, and more like.
• It is also tasked with the provision of services to those working with hazardous materials, major incident response, contagious disease surveillance and control, harm reduction concerning polluted environments, alcohols and drugs substance misuse treatment, monitoring health promotion and healthy diet, and anti-smoking awareness provision, and more like.

AGRICULTURAL & FARMING COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for regional regulation of agricultural and farming standards within its region. The standard to which food is produced in an ethno-corporatist state is enshrined in African law at the national level, and applies to all regional farming and agricultural establishments equally, with some variations between regions.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of Environment & Public Health.
• This Commission is tasked with its regional regulation of food safety, including health and safety within agricultural lands and their types of equipment, transportation, food processing, whole-stocks and retail-stocks provisions and distributions.
• This Commission is tasked with the responsibility to regulate agricultural standards and the impacts on farming within its region and also ensures that the regional agricultural sector operates in conformity with national guidelines. It also advises on climate change, export opportunities in foreign trade that may be open to the secretariat, and food quality in protecting the interests of African consumers.

INTERNATIONAL-TRAVEL COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency responsible for its regional citizens’ international travel affairs outside of Africa. It is the travel planner commissioning agency for regional citizens and residents alike, at the governmental level, in response to the operational non-monetary economy at the national level of all African states.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministry of National Insurance & Multinational Finance.
• This Commission is tasked with the vetting process of its regional citizens’ international foreign endeavours for any purpose, such as tourism, education, personal vocation, and more. It offers governmental support to citizens in all areas of foreign travel; it issues travel expenses to each traveller in form of a cash-card; provides accommodations and information about the foreign destination to each traveller, and more.

BASIC UTILITY COMMISSION

• This Commission is a citizenry-centred economic-unionist regulatory agency and responsible for the maintenance of provision of water, electricity, telecom, Wi-Fi, and more like to its regional residents. It maintains basic infrastructures for its regional public and household services.
• It is headed by its regional economic-unionist and regulated by the economy-branch of government under the incumbency office of the economy-prime minister, but it receives its executive operational directives from the secretariat-ministries of HomeLand-Affairs, Labour & Industry, Technology & Science Research, and Environment & Public Health.
• This Commission is particularly tasked with activity in the maintenance and provisions of various measures on all essential necessities and public infrastructures to individual households within its region, such as water resource, electricity supply, telecommunication, natural gas, sewage, Wi-Fi in public places and internet interface in every home, and other digital and electronic peripherals within its region.
• Since the Commission is responsible for the provisioning delivery services of multi use-values activities in response to the national non-monetary economy, it is typically composed of Commissioners with different designations, who are commissioned to perform specified duties and tasks in a specific department within the Commission. The commissioners for this commissioning agency are staffed by their respective regional citizenry-electorates, and their dedicated staffs are staffed by the secretariat-ministry of Labour – those with the tasks to implement and enforce citizenry prescribed legal-Guidelines applicable to their industry, and their regional commission’s rules and regulations. They monitor and conduct reporting on relevant activities within their region, and enforcement of citizens’ regulatory compliance.

Commicracy flowing from interests of collective-individualism

The theory of individualism is the sordid reality of giving us a sense that the world revolves around the individual selves, that to commits to the culture of individualism is virtue and engagement with others is the necessary motive to satisfy our individual self-interest goals, and that as individuals we must act without reference to the needs of others. The doctrine of individualism then becomes the condition of class-collaboration and class-society, is it not? What about collectivism?

One might think the theory of collectivism is the opposite of individualism, and indeed it is undeniable that the theory of collectivism is the practice or principle of individuals within the group to giving priority to group interests above individual self-interest goals, and that individuals within the group are those subordinate in lower class within a social collective such as in a state or a nation, a race or a social class. Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) theorised the condition of collectivism as a social-contract and argued that “individual finds his true being and freedom only in submission to the general-will of the community”. The doctrine of collectivism then becomes the condition of social-contract – between the government and the governed, the employer and the employee, and of bureaucratic organisation.

Whilst it has been the norm to see the theory of collectivism on the one hand – the “We” consciousness of a group, and individualism on the other – the “I” consciousness of the individual, as the practice of oppositions to each other; and you will be perfectly right to expect that I take such a position. But that will be the case only if the combined theory of collective-individualism expresses contrasting influences between individuals within the group. Since that has not been the case, and the doctrine of collective-individualism has been the desire of individualistic actions to promote the general interests of the group based on the complementary forces of reciprocity and self-interest goals of individuals within the group – of what I identified and called: the “You and I” or “They and I” collaborative consciousness between the individual and the others – which then results in the doctrine of collective-individualism to be the condition of altruistic-relations.

Then, I say, all questions that refer to any contrasting definition and what inverse theory should be ascribed to independent actions of the two theories between ‘Individualism’ and ‘Collectivism’ must be eliminated. For much of social intercourse of collective-actions and individual-actions, as we have experienced it in bureaucratic societies, has been the practice of individualism in its citizenry socio-economic relations and the practice of collectivism in its institutional organisations it appropriates to meet the demands of its bureaucratic social-systems of social-control, while the practice of collective-individualism has been suppressed and not allowed to thrive until now. Now to our subject-matter, what do we understand by commicracy flowing from interests of collective-individualism?

The social-contract of collectivism as practised in our protégé society in Africa and regulated by its governing administration of politics under the banner of bureaucracy – in the social life of the individuals, in their economic lives, spiritual lives and private lives also – is what I called: Class of consent to subjugation.

They defined individualism as in opposition to collectivism, and they say individualism offers the only path to individualistic self-interest goals in society and that the social-contract of collectivism offers the path to consideration of the consensual relationship between the classes in society. Whereas by focusing on the rights and interests of the group above that of the individual, collectivism has turned out to be a failure over the will of the institution of bureaucracy in its submission of individuals to thrive on being in a position of authority; that we must see the acquisition of bureaucratic-power as the means to improve our individual social status in society; that being in a position of authority means that we are superior to others that are placed in lower status to us, and that others must be addressed in a condition as if they are lesser beings to us; that we must regard economic status as very important to attain in society as the means to guarantee to attain a higher social status than others; that when competing with others our sole focus is to win over them as opposed to expressing positive interests in a diversity of corposense and knowhow; and that we should believe that being successful financially or with social ranks than others makes us better than others who are less accomplished.

Whilst it is far easier for the ethics of bureaucracy to focus upon the social-contract of collectivism than upon the altruist-relation of collective-individualism, I say by taking advantage of the inequality of the bargaining power between the government and the governed, between the employer and the employee, and even within patriarchy social systems where men hold primary power, social privileges and control over women, the practice of bureaucracy flowing from interests of collectivism is the vulnerability of the oppressed and in which the rights and interests of class collaborations are emphasised.

I point out that the work condition of those in higher-ranks earning more in salary than those in lower ranks in a bureaucratic organisation– with such ethical constructs that placed those in a higher-rank position of authority to earning more in salary and the moral-licence to exert authoritarian rules over those in lower-ranks to them – is a condition that sees those in lower-ranks as victims of corporate-subjugation. I highlight that the work-ethics of employers bossing over employees – in the position of power where those who placed themselves in higher-ranks in the bureaucratic organisation put their needs first above that of those in lower-ranks to them – is a condition that placed those employees in a salary paid jobs everywhere in the discriminative economic status of inequality.

Indeed, however, many employees everywhere are victims of institutionalised inequality, but we should remind ourselves that they are not victims of their employers or those in higher-ranks to them. Rather, they are simply victims of the bureaucratic system that have submitted the social-contract of their social and economic status into inequality. I say anyone in our 21st-century generation who, owing to their right to engage in work activities, and finding themselves working as employers and employees or in a bureaucratic organisation of higher-ranks and lower-ranks, are in holy-alliance in the social-contract of subjugation by consent with bureaucracy – what I referred to as a class of consent to subjugation.

In our contempt of bureaucracy and its class of consent to subjugation of the working-group as the social-action of bureaucratic-subjugation and economic-action of institutionalised-inequality, I took on the path of analysis to explore the place of commicracy as an organisational structure with the ethno-corporatist economy and its governmental administration of govox-populi in the proposed theory of ethnosocialism in Africa.

The emergence of the proposed organisation of commicracy, because it focuses upon the altruist-relations of collective-individualism than upon the social-contract of collectivism, and neglect completely the class-collaboration of individualism, encourage the proposal of this manifesto to shore up the practice-mechanism of commicracy with awareness of our circumstances in mind, and to have it weighed and measured. Here, commicracy is advanced to take the place of the organisational structure in the work-place, matrimony, state-government, and in fact everywhere else that the notion of bureaucracy exists. The emphasis is on the role of commicratic organisation structure in justifying a nation’s societal relations and equality-delivery procedure for all, and to the exception of no other.

I propose for the abolition of bureaucracy, and view the existence of web-internetisation, in fact, all the open-data of information, open-government of politics, open-access to scientific research and inventions, free-culture of education and culture, as the manifestation of our current revelation-age the world over – allowing individuals to exercise their individualistic expressions and privilege of choosing freely based on the condition of collective-individualism emerging as the content of commicracy.

In this context, I define collective-individualism as the interdependent quality of individuals’ expression of self and of corposense that unceasingly progressing interwoven into other individuals’ multi-dimensional achievements of the collective, within which the designs of every individuals are continuously re-interpreted, re-modified, re-translated, and re-distributed theoretically and practically, and producing the laws of fusionism of endless origination of development.

I say, African governments should come together as ‘One-Nation and One-Nationality’ and begin the deconstruction of African social and economic affairs, in reconstructing all legal structure into ethnopublican nationalism-structure. With an ethnopublican legal framework, regional communities are interdependent divisions with some degree of internal autonomy to making their own laws, where regional citizens would be responsible for the govoxical direction of their regional economy.

We need to begin with economic skills already in operation or capable of being operational within each regional community and to industrialised each respective regional infrastructures to support the identified economic empowerment of each region across Africa. We need to recognise that ethnopublican structure makes certain that citizenry’ healthy-individualism and their expression of self and of corposense must validate each other by dissolving all manner of bureaucratic legal frameworks and impediments to the full, and set into ethnopublican legal structure that sets into law the commicratic legal rights of individuals’ free expression of their common-design as collectives.

The demand for the proposed development of African ethno-corporatist economy to align fully with global corporatism, the necessary requirements to abolish the bureaucratic legal structure and put in place commicracy in its stead, and the determination to place the legislative-power of the state in the control and directions by the citizenry-electorates to prescribe social and economic agendas to be implemented by the government, compel the proposed deconstruction of all African states into a unitary state of ethnopublic.

On the ethnopublican nationalism-structure, the govox-populi government is, and forever will be, of interdependent-leadership upon the citizenry-electorates. The governing role of govoxiers is precisely determined by the constitution because of the non-party system of govox-populi government and the commissioning distinctiveness of the source of state-governmental legal power to govern.

This, however, does not mean that the govox-populi government is a commissioning agency for the ethnopublican state, but it is an arm of the ethnopublican nationalism-structure. When we looked at the layers of doctrine imposed by the conflicting ideas of democratic government structure to examine the true nature of the republican nationalism-structure and its arm of the state-governmental legal power of politics to govern – which, I submit, is premised on the power of the class-collaboration of the collective – the governing role of politicians will therefore continue to promote its condition of social-contract to a class of consent to the subjugation of those they governed.

I say, collective-individualism in the economic life of African citizens will further be progressed by the installation of the proposed economic system of ethno-corporatism in Africa. Issues such as the alleviation of poverty, money inspired crimes and scarce economic resource to afford the social welfare of African people would not only be resolved but would occupy the domestic agenda of regional citizenry-electorates anywhere and everywhere as it is occurring.

However, as the working population shifts away from the capitalist work-ethics to the new corporatist web-internetisation platform, the state-centred implementation performance to prioritise economic-equality that favours the working-group and non-working group proportionately in control of the working-group and their labour would often lie in the control and directions by the regional citizenry-electorates.

As African economic power increases so as our human social problems as we have it today would become non-existent, but those changes would deliver us to nurturing new social challenges. The result to be expected is a never-ending revision of the legal methods to exercise state-control over the corruption of individualism – that is not in alignment with their claimed relationship with the collectives – to resolve developing new social problems.

After all, the role of the StateLords-Assembly will be to confront the problems of determining the social morality of regional communities, such as those who will be inclined to have drawn their decisions on affairs of the state and their socio-economic life from religious theses, for example, in an adverse effect to the practical applications of their current circumstances and African society. I say, in a nation founded and premised upon the common-unity of socio-economic life of its citizenry, there is no room to have drawn decisions from any other source separate from the practical goals of socio-economic advances. Deconstruction of African social and economic affairs into ethnopublicanism, based on collective-individualism of Africans collectively, would push counter to such extremities of the almost sacrosanct social goals of racial, religion or ethnic comradeship and exclusionary zoning of people.

When I say that the theory of ethnosocialism is a hard-line of the theory of socialism: that with it the all hitherto common-unity based on race, religion or ethnicity would not be prioritised above the common-unity of socio-economic life of society; that ethnosocialism literally means a community of people or nation united based on their shared control of government and control of the economy for the benefit of all and to the exclusion of no other; and that ethnosocialism is a strand of socio-economic populocracy – the combination of empirical-socialism and traditional structures with customary notions of community tailored to a particular society cultural-mores, values, and it operates in practice as a system of resource-trade-interchange socialism and non-monetary economy.

The result of the theory of ethnosocialism is the proposed ethnopublican nationalism-structure that promotes the legitimacy of the socio-economic custom as dominant without the power-imposition of any group to interfere with the govoxical structure of ethnopublicanism with any disruptive of the normative underpinnings ethnicity, religion or race. Any notion of social goals that grants the legislative-power of the state in the control and directions by the community of citizenry-electorates to interfere with the ethnosocialist legal structure or ethnopublican nationalism-structure should not be assumed.

As a result, the ethnosocialist concept of collective-individualism and its condition of altruist-relations between people in society is, from theory to practice, that it would deflect attention away from dealing with that sordid necessity or standpat-socialism for engaging with one another as humans based on race, religion or ethnic customs, and focusing our attention to doing more to meeting our common altruistic responsibilities in the socio-economic service to one another, as it had been practiced in existence in the Stone-Age era in our human society.

The starting point in which I proposed for the deconstruction of our common-unity into socio-economic custom will begin from what is occurring as the factual customary way of life in our current revelation-age, globally. The hierarchical representation of the working-classes – the so-called upper-class, middle-class and lower-class – as recognised and defined in capitalist work-ethics, we would shift from working-class representation to working-group representation in the proposed ethno-corporatist work-ethics. We would call for regional governance to empower regional citizenry-electorates with the legislative-power, under the regulatory control of the citizenry-branch of government.

However, whether because of the developing economic power of African society or to the bearing for the reality of new economic industries that will develop within local regions and townships, we should expect seeing the obvious: the working-groups would find themselves evenly located between the cities and townships. The individual habitual location would reveal a preference for the industry a worker works in – where, for example, primary and secondary industries would routinely be located in townships and tertiary and quaternary industries in cities. Those citizenry-electorates habitating in cities would be responsible for the urban development plan and allocation of economic resources, just as those habitating in townships would be responsible for the economic empowerment of their villages and towns and the making of state-centred decisions to direct the demographic distribution of human population across their regions in maintaining areas where industries and agriculture, forestry and greenbelt and outdoor leisure would be most suitable and be expected to prevail.

The allocation of economic resources across urban and rural areas through judicial interpretation by the StateLords should not be expected to operate to question whether the ethno-socialist system of prioritising socio-economic custom meets the needs of ethnic, religion or racial beliefs a group may have at the expense of socio-economic interests of the state.

In fact, whilst it is the norm for regional citizenry-electorates to submit policies for the secretariat-branch of government to implement in laws and customs of their regional communities, but the judicial-branch of government conform policies submitted to it to interpret and enforce in conformity to the ethnopublican legal structure that prioritises socio-economic customs in the interest of African society collectively above all else. Although regional governance may respond to problems of demography that may attempt to transform their rural community into the urban community from which they may not desire, for example, but ethnopublican legal structure does not respond to any call for an economic, govoxical, or social basis for the creation of an ethnic, religious or racial-regional community.

Ethnopublican legal structure fights against the moral current of ethnic, racial and religious beliefs on matters of socio-economic preference, and promotes the socio-economic preference as the basis for empowering regional governance. That which strengthens social advances and economic welfare of African society will be implemented; that which proposes to impede the quest of equality-delivery and its altruist-relations will be rejected.

Whilst it is the role of the govoxiers to persuade those who had migrated to regional communities – to contribute their economic useful-values throughout their working life in meeting their socio-economical use-values throughout life – that it is in their best interest as a collective to engage and takes part in the govoxical happenings within their regions that direct the social and economic conditions that apply to them; meanwhile, the ethnopublican legal structure already put contingencies in place that safeguards the rights of the working-group by raising fixed constitutional protections around the governance of individual regional communities that protects migrated workers from any indigenous’ ethnic, religion or racial beliefs they may have.

We say that the ethnic culture and habitual customs of regional citizens can be maintained side-by-side with the socio-economic customs and ambition of the ethnopublican state without the need to interfere with the economic empowerment of regional communities, provision of welfare services and social desires of the collectives that are habitating or dwelling within the region.

This argument, however, is a wholesome adoption of the ethno-socialist theory of govoxical populocracy. The fragmentation of regional governance into diversity – between the indigenous citizenry-electorates and the migrated citizenry-electorates who are part of the working-group or non-working group in education – produces significant test for altruist-relations within regional governance that promotes the performance of the theory of equalism and inclusion in our current 21st-century’ revelation-age.

We say that just as calls for regional governance in the control and directions by the regional citizenry-electorates is futuristic, so as the sole reliance on independent-leadership of politicians has now become standpat – because the ethical constructs of the structure of politics are not equipped with what is required to independently enforce the positive contribution of diversity in the age-of-revelation. Acknowledging the migration of the working-group from different cities and townships to populate other regional townships and cities throughout their working life will be a revealed preference that will help solve such problems as unemployment and poverty that the protégé society is nurturing at the present time in Africa. For that, we say the ethnopublican legal structure already fashion a mechanism that internalises all aspects of diversity within regions across Africa.

The four (4) branches of government in an ethnopublican state, I referred to as the: Quandra govoxical model, is proposed for this purpose: first, the citizenry-branch of government removes the barriers to the expression of the populous on the day-to-day administration of state government and place regional governance in the control and directions by the regional citizenry-electorates to create the community that they desire, as long as their governance decision is not directed to impede the normative values of socio-economic customs that benefits African society collectively.

Second, the economy-branch of government is set free as an interdependent division of ethnopublican state’s government with separate commissioning-powers and responsibilities to the working-group, to commit to their existing jurisdiction without internationally imposed limitations to interference against the progress of the socio-economic customs of self-sufficiency subsistence and the end of economic-class that the working-group seek in Africa.

Third, the secretariat-branch of government is here to carry out the administrative work and implement policies of ethnopublican state as directed by the citizenry-electorates and the working-group and provides overall administrative guidance.

Fourth, the judicial-branch of government is the supervisory-arm of the other three branches of government and provides overall judicial guidance in its interpretations and reviews of the laws in their conformity to the constitution.

Here on the next page I submit a diagram of the Quandra Govoxical Model, as will be further expressed in this manifesto:

In the ethnopublican govoxical system, according to the quandra govoxical model, the judicial-branch holds the highest office and is occupied by the StateLords, followed by the secretariat-branch who holds the executive-arm of government, the citizenry-branch holds the citizenry-legislative-arm of government, and lastly, the economy-branch holds the economy-legislative-arm of government. But none of the four branches of government is constitutionally empowered to have a superior power of any kind over any of the other.

We say that the condition of power in a government office is not associated with a higher or lower office in a govox-populi government. Using the term ‘higher and lower’ is to show their position within the govox-populi frame akin to a bas-relief. Because they technically have equal powers, like the borders on a square frame, each of their roles is limited to performing checks and balances on one another in protecting the freedom of the governed from both the interdependent supervisory and administrative guidelines of the branches of government’s performance on behalf of the state.

We say that it is here that citizenry-electorates confront the limits of state power of govox-populi government to govern in an ethnopublican state. For example, whilst the judicial-arm of government would seek to answer what is permissible and impermissible for regional governance concerning their ethnic custom, religious practice, racial belief or socio-economic affairs, the economy-legislative-arm of government would seek to answer the extent to which regional governances can be allowed to define themselves economically or otherwise. The answer that the citizenry-legislative-arm of government would seek lies in how a regional community translates their own moral argument – either drawn from their ethnic beliefs or religious thesis – that will serve as the persuasive compass with which govoxiers working as citizenry-committees guides their constituents’ citizenry-electorates to making decisions that will be permissible in law. This strand of ethnomethodological approach is the normative means with which the judicial-arm of government will seek to orient its legal interpretation performance to achieve equality within the methods a regional community used to construct, account for and give meaning to their social world.

There will, however, be regional communities where the people are govoxical savvy or they have within their communities the desired skills-set and sufficient labour-power to demand their economic empowerment without the need to migrate workers from other towns and cities to populate their regions. We say, by default or by chance, some regional communities will remain within the ethnic or religious community of what may appear to be the driving force of their moral decisions to regional governance of socio-economic custom. To address the diversity associated with such regional happenstance, the contingent part of the deconstruction of African social and economic affairs set out the role of the secretariat-branch of government as an intermediate tier of regional governance to shore up their principal universal role in socio-economic decisions that promotes their economic resource redistribution across Africa. Such redistribution we would make to be nation-wide across Africa – not the commonly feared self-consumption non-monetary economics produced and consumed within regions.

REFERENCE AND SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

REPUBLICANISM:

• Philip Pettit (1997) Republicanism: A Theory of Freedom and Government, Clarendon Press, ISBN: 0-19-829083-7.
• Andrew Lintott (2003) The Constitution of the Roman Republic, Publisher : Oxford University Press, USA, ISBN-13 : 978-0199261086.
• Abbott, Frank Frost (1901) A History and Description of Roman Political Institutions. Elibron Classics. ISBN 0-543-92749-0.
• Livy; De Sélincourt, A.; Ogilvie, R. M.; Oakley, S. P. (2002). The early history of Rome: books I-V of The history of Rome from its foundations. Penguin Classics. ISBN 0-14-044809-8.
• Taylor, Lily Ross (1966). Roman Voting Assemblies: From the Hannibalic War to the Dictatorship of Caesar. The University of Michigan Press. ISBN 0-472-08125-X.

POPULOCRACY:

• Catherine Fieschi, An Introduction to Populocracy; and Populocracy: The Tyranny of Authenticity and the Rise of Populism, Agenda Publishing; 1st edition (2019), ISBN: 9781788210256.
• Mogens Herman Hansen (1998)The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, Publisher: Bristol Classical press, ISBN: 978-1853995859.

NATIONALISM:

• Smith, Anthony D. (1995). Nations and Nationalism in a Global Era. Cambridge: Polity Press. ISBN: 9780745610191.
• Ahmed, J.M (1960) The Intellectual Origins of Egyptian Nationalism. Published by Oxford University Press, London.
• Đilas, Milovan (1983) [1957]. The New Class: An Analysis of the Communist System, San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. ISBN 0-15-665489-X.
• Đilas, Milovan (1998). Fall of the New Class: A History of Communism’s Self-Destruction. Alfred A. Knopf. ISBN: 0-679-43325-2.
• Crosland, Anthony (2006) [1952]. The Future of Socialism. Constable. ISBN 978-1845294854.
• Smith, Anthony D. (2004). The Antiquity of Nations. Cambridge and Malden: Polity Press. ISBN 9780745627465.
• Smith, Anthony D. (2000). The Nation in History: Historiographical Debates about Ethnicity and Nationalism. Hanover: University Press of New England. ISBN 9781584650409.

PAN-AFRICANISM:

• Padmore, George, ed. History of the Pan-African Congress. London: Hammersmith, 1947.
• Campbell, Horace. Pan-Africanism: The Struggle against Imperialism and Neocolonialism, Documents of the Sixth Pan-African Congress. Toronto: Afro Carib Publications, 1975.
• Nkrumah, Kwame. I Speak of Freedom: A Statement of African Ideology. London: Heinemann, 1961.
• Zachernuk, Philip. Colonial Subjects: An African Intelligentsia and Atlantic Ideas. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press, 2000.
• Moses, Wilson J. The Golden Age of Black Nationalism 1850–1925. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books, 1978.
• Nantambu, Kwme. 1998. Pan-Africanism versus Pan-African Nationalism. Journal of Black Studies 28 (5): 561–175.
• Du Bois, William E. B. 1965. The World and Africa: An Inquiry into the Part Which Africa Has Played in World History. New York: International Publishers.

BUREAUCRACY:

• Martin Reeves, Edzard Wesselink, and Kevin Whitaker (2020), The End of Bureaucracy, Again? https://www.bcg.com/en-gb/publications/2020/changing-business-environment-pushing-end-to-bureaucracy
• Murray N. Rothbard (1998). The Ethics of Liberty. Humanities Press, New York University Press. ISBN: 978-0-8147-7506-6.
• Nigro, Lloyd G. (Ed) (1984) Decision Making In The Public Sector. J. Hood, Booksellers, inc. Published ISBN: 9780824771553.
• Haufler, Virginia (2013). A Public Role for the Private Sector: Industry Self-Regulation in a Global Economy. Carnegie Endowment. ISBN 9780870033377.
• Laurent Carnis, Université Gustave Eiffel (January 2009) The Economic Theory of Bureaucracy: Insights from the Niskanian Model and the Misesian Approach, The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 12(3):57-78.

PERSUASIVE-POWER:

• Bizzell, Patricia; Herzberg, Bruce, eds. (1990). The Rhetorical tradition: readings from classical times to the present. Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press. ISBN 978-0312003487.
• Herman Cohen (1994) The History Of Speech Communication: The Emergence Of A Discipline, Published by Speech Communication Association, ISBN:13: 9780944811146.
• Charles U Larson (2009) Persuasion: Reception and Responsibility, Wadsworth Publishing Co Inc; 12th ed. Edition, ISBN-13 : 978-0495567509
• William Safire, (2004) Lend Me Your Ears: Great Speeches in History ISBN 978-0-393-05931-1.
• Chris Kalaboukis, (May-2-2017) How The Internet Has Changed The Psychology of Persuasion and Influence, by ThinkFutue: Embracing Innovation Disruption & Future (medium.com)
• Steve McKevitt, How The Power of Persuasion Goes Beyond Mere Advertising, by The Conversation www.theconversation.com
• Nathalie Nahai, (2012) Online Persuasion, Published by Pearson; 1^st edition. ISBN-13: 978-0273772958

HUMANISM:

• Kurtz, Paul (2000). Humanist manifesto: a call for a new planetary humanism. Prometheus Books, Amherst, NY. ISBN 157392783X.
• Nicolas Walter’s (1997) Humanism – What’s in the Word, Rationalist Press Association -London, ISBN 0-301-97001-7.
• Morain, Lloyd; Morain, Mary (2007). Humanism as the Next Step. Humanist Press. Washington, D.C. ISBN 978-0931779091.
• Lamont, Corliss (1997). The Philosophy of Humanism, Eighth Edition. Humanist Press: Amherst, New York. ISBN 0-931779-07-3.

REVELATION-ERA:

• Berners-Lee, Tim; Mark Fischetti (1999). Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by its inventor. Orion Business, Britain. ISBN 978-0-7528-2090-3.
• World Wide Web Consortium, Patent Policy—5 February 2004.
• Baker, Ronald J (2008), Mind over matter: why intellectual capital is the chief source of wealth, ISBN 9780470198810.
• Lessig, Lawrence (2004). Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity. New York: Penguin. ISBN 9781101200841.
• Andrew Keen (2007) The Cult of the Amateur: How Today’s Internet Is Killing Our Culture. Published by Currency, ISBN 0385520808.
• Dariusz Jemielniak; Aleksandra Przegalinska (2020). Collaborative Society. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-35645-9.

COLLECTIVISM AND INDIVIDUALISM:

• Marilynn Brewer and Ya-Ru Chen (2007), “Where (Who) Are Collectives in Collectivism? Toward Conceptual Clarification of Individualism and Collectivism,” Psychological Review, 114 (1): 133-151.
• C. Harry Hui and Harry C. Triandis (1986), “Individualism-Collectivism: A Study of Cross-Cultural Researchers,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 17(2): 225-248
• Daphna Oyserman, Heather M. Coon, and Markus Kemmelmeier (2002), “Rethinking Individualism and Collectivism: Evaluation of Theoretical Assumptions and Meta-Analyses,” Psychological Bulletin 128 (1), 3-72.
• Kwok Leung and Michael H. Bond (1984), “The Impact of Cultural Collectivism on Reward Allocation,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47 (4): 793-804.
• Yoshihisa Kashima, Susumu Yamaguchi, Uichol Kim, Sang-Chin Choi, Michele Gelfand, Masaki Yuki (1995). “Culture, Gender, and Self: A Perspective From Individualism-Collectivism Research,” Journal of Personality & Social Psychology 69(5):925-937.
• R.S. Zaharna (Jan 28, 2013) Culture Posts: Individualism, Collectivism – and Relationalism, University of Southern California’s Centre of Public Diplomacy press.