Introduction:

Disclaimer: the subject matter of this paper is new but must be classed as an opinion-piece and cannot be classified as scientific [not being based on past peer acceptance] and is theoretical [not based on the scientific method [that is measurement]] and it's use may conflict with peer acceptance. Secondly, the paper is, in truth, scientific because (1) it is based on absolutes [as it must for comparisons to be made], and (2) on the simplest absolutes [unlike Newtonian physics that is based on the more complicated force equals mass times acceleration]. Thirdly, mistakes [contextual] may occur because I am a generalist, whereas a specialist is a specialist [conceptual] in a subject and would not be expected to make mistakes. Fourthly, social science and social engineering require organisation that is entangled and contextual [not conceptual] and this state of affairs is a result of relativity and cannot be eliminated.

Preamble

Over three papers [6, 7, 8] the Batemans Bay Soldiers Club has provided a convenient and insightful view of how a small group of soldiers [in 1934] has been transformed into a gargantuan Club-house overlooking the water at Batemans Bay. of such size that ' it is an amazing balance sheet though. Masses of cash. Great property investments. No debt. This is a very powerful and successful business. Likely the most powerful and successful in Batemans Bay.' [6] This club has become a centre-piece of the town by funnelling the social and gaming profits into a monument to itself, similar to the pyramid-building of the Pharaohs in ancient Egypt and I have used it as an example of public servants ignoring social responsibility for their own glorification and amusement.

The Batemans Bay Soldiers Club has no goal [for the future] other than to get bigger and more obtrusive and that mindset possibly aligns with the public servant's personality defect that is undermining society as shown in the choice of CEO and Board. This lack of interested shareholders [the Club being non-profit], as are found in a regular business, appears to need social engineering and better governance [than top-down guesses] built on absolutes to understand society's problems, that is also pertinent to the Council, State and Federal governance.

Preface

By using this theory of relativity [of everything] we can derive a universe built on concept and context that are the absolutes that make philosophy a science and determine the goals for any endeavour [9].

In particular, modern democracies are built on ill-informed [no absolutes] Constitutions [old and out of date] determined by top-down thinking [not bottom-up organisation], representational [politicians], inconvenient [no electronics], un-manageable [fixed term] with incompetent leaders [ public servants] and no available advice [social engineering platforms] to allow a dangerously misinformed [and possibly corrupted] governance. The eventual outcome for any governance must be a goal and the most sort-after goal [held for over two thousand years] is the Second Coming when everything, whatever that may be, is 'made right'.

The story so far is that the Registered Clubs should be able to see, I believe, using social engineering, that they have short-changed their customers and should [mea culpa] contribute [for example] a million dollars each [a year] to a Faculty of Organisation [or similar] at Batemans Bay [through electronics] for historical reasons [6]. This goal, like everything else, is firstly a concept [mea culpa or legislation] and secondly should provide the finance to improve the intrusion of its gambling policies into the community. The context [of social engineering] will affect every aspect of governance, business and society at all levels but it needs the relativity [as defined in the creation equation] of the physical to provide the bottom-up organisation that defines the form of the goal commensurate with the restrictions that delimit our universe [10].

Science, and in particular physics, uses energy without formal organisation derived from a creation equation [energy plus organisation is nothing] that is a restriction on the philosophical concept plus context is nothing. Hence scientific papers reflect the concept and are concise and to the point but this theory [based on organisation] is contextual and as everything is entangled will require a number of papers that do not have concise [conceptual] conclusions [see disclaimer].

Why is this Theory Necessary.

Australia has been called the Lucky Country with a continent-sized [albeit poorly resourced] island and a small population that worked hard and prospered, built a nation with a Constitution but lurking was the problem of organisation. The two-party governance evolved with Labor representing the worker and the Coalition of the Nationals [country] and Liberals [business] representing business. The Liberals were content to see a 5% growth-rate [GDP] and, with falling birthrate, suggested 190,000 immigrants to maintain that growth [8] whilst Labor, for a long time supported migration if the people were of a similar culture so that wages were not under-cut [White Australia Policy, until 80 years ago]. Post WWII the Labor Party loosened the restriction to increase the population [Beautiful Balts (Baltic)] and socialism set in to produce multiculturalism where areas became Little-India, China-town etc.

Consider the Lima Agreement and the claim that the Labor government reduced Australia's manufacturing to help developing countries 'AAP FactCheck - A baseless claim that a 1975 UN declaration forced Australia to slash manufacturing by 30 per cent has resurfaced online' however 'Mr Jones also said that since the declaration, a more challenging economic environment and increased competition from developing countries had led the government to revise its manufacturing policy' (Wikipedia, Lima Agreement) This suggests a world-wide socialist agenda including the United Nations, International Monetary Fund etc. and was behind the thinking of the then Labor government [Jones] and Australia's manufacturing has now been decimated by imports. It would seem that the absolute for a strong country should become 1 culture, 1 religion, 1 goal and our own production. This is shown by the present situation [closure of the Hormuz strait] where Australia has closed most of its refineries, imports 80% of its fuel needs [because it is cheaper] and finds itself with only 30 days reserve and the Prime Minister [Albanese] scooting around overseas begging for fuel.

The Western so-called democracies are in a bind in that they would like to stop borrowing but cannot presumably because of the public servants propensity to spend other-people's money to boost their image etc. Australia owes 1 trillion dollars and we have no way to control politicians [except at elections]. Clearly, we need a management voting system that allows us to firstly, be informed and secondly, change our vote easily and opportunely and this can be done with electronics also, with organisation, we don't have to suffer the corruptions [workers and women creating a double orthogonality] that has been built in by public servants over the last 200 years. These are a few of the many improvements that understanding organisation can bring to society. 

Creating God

Life is one social problem after another with wars, lack of housing, foreigners etc. and there is good reason for this because we don't understand organisation. We invented [or recognised] God to try to make sense of everything because physics uses energy only [Newtonian physics] and society uses [top-down] guesses so we are reduced to creating or recognising a God to under-pin and organise our lives or at least set goals. We were 'created in God's image', 'God is everywhere', 'God listens to our prayers', 'God gave us rules to live-by' etc. so God could be an underlying organisation. We use God as a software filter to our thinking that is bottom-up from religious instruction that was deemed necessary but a new theory has emerged that formalises organisation with energy and, I believe, the universe becomes clear without enigmas.

We only need to ask a simple question to create God, for example, in algebra it is 'let “x” be the answer and I say let God be that something that is relative to energy and 'lo and behold', God is there in [what we call 'organisation'] and is everywhere, entangled and necessary to understand literally everything. For example, physics uses a simple Newtonian physics with measurement and [to make sure that everyone agrees with their physical laws they] use 'peer review' and are stuck with a guess that is 350 years old and as a result, physics has become an unchanging 'religion' disallowing dissenters but if we add organisation we can understand everything [1, 2]. Relativity is the basis of our universe and reluctance to change is natural in religion or physics because it means building a new paradigm with all its problems, but now we need more appropriate answers.

We can have our prayers answered if we ask God properly [as an organisation that is a communication device] and God must answer if the question is direct enough [3, 4, 5] For example, in quantum mechanics God answers our question of wave or particle and in society we can't ask any questions because the only part of organisation that we know is 'the simplest way is usually the best' [Occam's razor]. So, seeking God [as an organisation] is becoming increasingly necessary as complication grows in a modern society. The Bible uses Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah etc. as descriptions [organisational parables] of where we are headed, so, seek formal organisation and you might find that God is here and has always been here!

Entitlement and Responsibility

Our current governance is a representational so-called democracy that assigns the running of the country, states and regional councils to specific groups of residents such as business [Liberals], Labor [workers], Greens [environment] and religions [plural] etc. Clearly, they do this to extract benefits for themselves that are greater than they deserve and have [somewhat] alternately held the reins of power for the last hundred or so years. As a democracy, this is an abomination that is taken as normal, so, why have we accepted this state of affairs of a representational rather than a true democracy? We need to define a true democracy from the bottom-up starting with absolutes that relate to the physical [physics, [2]], organisation [1, 11, 12], the fractal simplicity of our universe [3, 5] and a goal for humanity [11, 4]. Technology has far outstripped our past ability to deal with this subject [without organisation] and we must face this challenge if we want society to work for us and not, as is happening, against us.

The mystique that we associate with the word democracy was once apt where everyone agreed on a course of action and the warriors were expected to march off without leaving a disgruntled group behind to create mischief. Hence, only well thought-out simple plans carried the day led by a leader that was unchallenged, and so, one must ask whether there is a distinction between Kingship and Democracy in its original form. This state of affairs lasted for thousands of years until very recently when the system was changed as 'in a direct democracy, the people have the direct authority to deliberate and decide legislation. In a representative democracy, the people choose governing officials through elections to do so. . . . . In virtually all democratic governments throughout ancient and modern history, democratic citizenship was initially restricted to an elite class, which was later extended to all adult citizens. In most modern democracies, this was achieved through the suffrage movements of the 19th and 20^th centuries.' (Wikipedia, Democracy)

Behind this quotation is a completeness that was recognised in the past [fealty] that underlies our entitlement and responsibility that was the necessity to go off [with the leader] to war on demand of the leader in exchange for enjoying a safe lifestyle and the right to reside in a particular community. Hence current wokeness [definition: alert to and concerned about social injustice and discrimination] is a movement towards greater entitlement or selfishness in the individual or family members that tests their responsibility to the species or State and this fealty that was once absolute but now has become Socratic [with no absolute] and is further eroded with multiculturalism.

The Philosophy of Change

'Change' is a simple concept-context that has to contend with restrictions forced on it by our evolution [and even shown in the necessary acceleration of our universe] because change is dangerous and is left to progeny while we carry on being successful. So, reluctance to change can be extraordinarily strong because it has been a driving factor [absolute] in our evolution for 3,000 million years. The classic example is physics that has made a religion out of  350 year-old Newtonian physics that has the mantra to measure and not theorise to the extent that it apparently closed-down the theory of modern physics 100 years ago. I have personal experience from a neuroscience paper [that was redacted [3]] that used the organisational base of quantum mechanics to explain the working of the mind [4]. Presumably the importance of physics and science in general [to the community] is such that physics dare not change but has turned itself into a religion that forbids any discussion of change. That physics has hobbled-along with the simple theory of Newton for so long shows the simplicity of the construction of the universe but it also means that social science is operating without organisation.

Social science is concerned with the organisation of people, families, groups, States, Countries and the whole of the modern World and to have organisation withheld is not only a corruption of physics but means a corruption of social science with a vastly different effect on each. The creation equation of our universe [according to this theory] is energy plus organisation is nothing which is a special case of a more general concept plus context is nothing where obviously energy is a concept and organisation is a context where a context [over many things] is 'equal' [orthogonal] to the concept  [continuous from zero to infinity]. This might seem strange but firstly, they are orthogonal [independent] and can only be considered separately and never with each other and so you can only consider one at a time.

 Secondly, they must be equal and orthogonal, not equal and opposite as physics and mathematics would say and both must be extended to cover the [orthogonality contained in] mathematical physics. Thirdly, using the more general creation equation leads to the mathematics used, I believe, in the mind-brain and is, of course based on orthogonality. This is quantum mechanics! Physics can't understand quantum mechanics [wave-particle duality] because physics is too simple and only considers energy [without organisation] and social science is left with nothing except Occam's razor that 'the simplest organisation is usually the best'. At this point the realisation must be of how our society is built on literally nothing and nothing that could be called scientific!

People think top-down [because society has no scientific base] which means that they can espouse an infinity of nonsensical ideas, and physics is largely based on guesses, including Newton's laws of motion [2] but a vast new intelligence is possible by thinking bottom-up [4] for the simple reason that instead of an infinite number of wrong guesses only one correct answer is derived [using bottom-up organisation]. Thus, physics' incompleteness [intended or not] has led to Newton's laws of motion being alchemical and in toto this contributes to the unintentional incompleteness that predates the Constitution and thus contributes to the dismal state of the Western 'democracies'.

The Basis of a Vote

Plato's philosopher-King is sensible in using a democracy of the King's nobles [as above] but contrast this entitlement [by position or wealth] of this group of nobles [that have a tangible stake in the country] with the psychologically-challenged snake-oil spruikers that are attracted to the political stage that we let determine our, and the country's fate. Extending this concept to a wider population [as intended here] requires an informed population of voters that are interested enough [through technology and viable options presented by experts, politicians or other influencers] to make an informed vote. A true democracy using electronics is far superior and less expensive than the lobbying, deals and favours of current elections but the monetary cost of changing and determining a true democracy could be met by the Batemans Bay Soldiers Club and others in the gaming industry as part of a mea culpa [6]. I believe that this theory has shown that a mea culpa exists when viewed through this theory of social engineering that starts [organisationally] at the creation equation [6, 7, 8] and that the base of our society is the social contract between the owners that have stake in the society and the un-entitled workers that hire themselves out.

Not surprisingly, in our fractal universe, lords and their ladies, business owners, house owners etc. are orthogonal [in general] to their [renting] employees, the old, infirm, unemployed etc. and have formed political parties [Labor/Democrats, Liberal/Republicans] that reflect this divide and try to influence the distribution of taxation. This disparity was created 200 years ago when the workers were given the vote and further watered-down by including women 100 years ago. This generosity could be considered a triumph for socialism as it corrupted the goal of a progressive nation and turned attention to the unsuccessful in life [according to survival of the fittest]. This was exacerbated  by the woman's vote [to a certain extent] who tended to vote Green that went to Labor because women tend to be inward family orientated [orthogonal to men as protectors].

Whilst our voting system might be considered to be fair to all parties [as individuals] digging deeper shows that three groups emerge and a simple yes/no vote means that we cannot expect anything meaningful from it, and yet this is our so-called democratic vote. Small wonder that the Western nations are at logger-heads over many issues when they have no inkling of the formal organisation presented here. The basic problem is that the orthogonalities contained in the voting system require a new approach that is a true democracy. Both physics and mathematics are currently incomplete because physics uses only energy and mathematics uses equality and that is why the two subjects seem to fit together. I believe that mathematical-physics is based on orthogonality [not equality] as shown by the structure of the creation equation and the mathematics of concept-context is used in the brain to produce the mind [4].

Physics considers cats and dogs to be separate entities and mathematics can add the numbers of each but mathematical-physics can add cats and dogs in terms of sameness and differences. In other words, a dog is a cat plus or minus differences. Thus a vote per person is a standard vote of unity less differences from the ideal that might be sickness, age, education, sex, what is being voted, what part of the country the voter lives in etc. This is the same as the driver behind survival of the fittest [concept] and takes into account the context of that person's abilities and is a simple mathematical model of a person relative to the situation of the vote. Thus in a true democracy the value of your vote will change depending on the question and may be zero if it is sex related, out of area etc. and uses the computers, phones and this organisation to pin-point the value of your vote to a question remembering that this value requires being informed, wanting to vote, able to vote and the ability to change your vote which leads to a management system. Thus, affected people can direct the goal.

Capitalism v Socialism

Thus, in our quantum mechanical either/or universe a person could be classed as a capitalist that has aims of being successful in owning businesses, houses or having something that is worth fighting for or that something might be personal such as your genes, your life etc. and you are prepared to work to retain it. This is the basis of survival of the fittest and and also benefits the State [Adam Smith] and these people tend to vote One nation/Liberal/Republican. On the other hand, the worker/socialist offers their labour in exchange for life's necessities and don't or can't save for their old age and is inclined to vote Labor/Democrat. If they become property owners they should, in theory, transfer their allegiance in the social contract. This is the capitalist system that provides incentive.

Money was invented as a universal medium of value and forms an absolute for comparison [for the rich versus the poor] and comprised gold, silver etc. that stabilised the monetary system but the relativity [of price to the goods that it buys] creates the problem of inflation that is used to despoil the system through 'bracket-creep'. Capitalism is putting money into productive enterprises whereas socialism is draining the country to cater to the benefit and selfishness of the workers and non-workers. Clearly, there would be a pool of workers, prospective owners and owners that form the swinging-voter class. There is supposed to be 'trickle-down' effects and the only fair way is a true democracy to determine the [Socratic] ratio of the benefit [to the country] and selfishness [to the individual]. The socialists tend to use laws [not organisation] to determine this choice whilst anyone may covert their neighbour's possessions, if he takes possession of them by force or law without agreement or adequate payment [by manipulation] that person is selfish and distorts the entitlement-responsibility agreement [6, 7, 8] of the tribe etc.

In other words, capitalism and socialism are organisations that are orthogonal so that socialism is suppressing innovation [there being no reward], ruling by fiat with an infinity of laws and constant policing to maintain order in an unchecked and unselected population directed by an elite using top-down decision making. A capitalist system aligns with a proven universal organisation of survival of the fittest with earning money replacing predation and minimal intrusion of public servants leads to independence that enables freedom of expression. Today our system is supposed to be a social-capitalist mix that has a voting system that is supposed to solve the Socratic question of taxes used to support the old, sick, maimed etc. Unfortunately, I believe, that a corruption has been introduced by our agents [in a representational democracy] that are living like Kings and Queens on taxpayers' money and pursuing socialist dreams to the extent that the Abanese Labor government is being called the 'worst ever'. Clearly, this governance has failed us!

The weakness of both systems is population and the beauty of survival of the fittest is the restriction of population through finite resources that technology changed. Business [Liberal/Republicans] and  politicians/public-servants [Labor/Democrats] both prefer growth for themselves to appear successful and no thought of selection of population occurs. Indeed, both parties foster immigration for their own gratification. The Liberals want a 5% increase yearly in GDP to stimulate the economy through immigration [6] and Labor presumably to increase business and Labor voters. The Liberals are a centre-right party started by Menzies at the time of the Second World War and immigration was irrelevant because of the White Australia Policy and high birthrate. A fringe right-leaning party [One Nation] sat at the sidelines for 30 years but has been catapulted to the fore because of the huge ingress of possibly unsuitable [3^rd world] immigrants by the Albanese government. The Liberals should have used social engineering to understand the situation and fix the birthrate problem instead of ineffectual baby-bonuses [11] because a strong nation, as defined by this theory, defines an absolute: 1 culture, 1 religion, 1 goal and make everything ourselves. Clearly global corporations try to increase trade from low-wage countries, 50% of the largest economies around the world are corporations [6] and politicians have neglected the economy by possibly saying that imports are saving time and money and ignoring the local production. 

Christianity v Islam

From the point of view of survival of the fittest [that is an organisational absolute] the sick, old, weak etc. are conveniently eliminated by predation but our society uses extreme measures to keep people alive to the extent that assisted-dying [of the terminally-ill] is fraught with restrictions presumably because of the religious-instruction that we not too-soon end this life to join our Maker. Religions are designed to be selfish, comforting and [possibly] explain our purpose in life and have formed a large part of our lives but they are old, difficult to believe [contain miracles], unchangeable and are finding it difficult to hold adherents in a modern world. Christianity is mainly aimed at the family and benefits women in particular and their position has been further advanced when women were allowed to vote, given birth-control, able to purchase property and have careers outside of the family supported by government social security, housing etc. The government intrusion into the structure of the family has weakened the evolutionary ties [orthogonality] between men and women that supplied replacement offspring with an average number of children currently being 1.5 per woman [versus 3 in the 1960s] that has directly led to increasing immigration.

Consider Christianity versus Islam that have been fighting for a thousand years and yet I have read that Islam was offered to Christianity as an update [but rejected] where the entrenched old-guard want to retain power. It would seem to involve territorial rights, unbending religious leaders and the sanctity of Bibles that has created the problems which underlie the influx of Islam into traditional Christian countries aided, it appears, by socialist-leaning weak and divisive politicians, economic and population pressures caused by the culture in some Islam countries. This culture prevents women participating fully in the workplace which lowers the strength of a nation [that provides immigrants] but provides children for growth and the younger, more strident Islam, whilst similar, confronts the requirement that immigrants assimilate into the population.

Consider that the absolute of a strong nation is 1 culture, 1 religion, 1 goal and make everything within a marketing area with closed borders [6, 7, 8] shows that bringing non-assimilating immigrants into the country will create problems and weaken the nation. The only organisational absolutes that work are those of the animals when they congregate in species, for a very good reason and that is to mate within their own group shown by the colours etc, that they sport, and attested by the proverb 'birds of a feather flock together'. Thus the multiculturalism that politicians have foisted on us are contrary to a strong nation and a strong species and this shows that politicians are working for some aim or group and not in our interest. Religions also have their own agenda and it is not in the general public's best interests because Christians and Islam have not brought these religions together [into one] over the last thousand years but have fought among themselves.

So, the two religions are basically the same and could have coalesced if organisational goals had been followed instead of the public servant-like self-glorification of the leaders. The difference is our concern and firstly, Islam has the power over women that enables the birthrate to be [at least] replacement level secondly, they are flooding into the Christian nations due to the availability of social security designed to entice Christian women to do their duty and provide a replacement or required growth rate. Thirdly, do we wish to be replaced by a [possibly] inferior culture and do women wish to be restricted to home-life without outside work, the Burqa [a long, loose garment covering the whole body from head to feet, worn in public by some Muslim women] and being a second-rate citizen? Fourthly, it is in a woman's interest, according to a basic rule of survival of the fittest that she choose the best possible male to mate with and not being a chattel confined to an inferior male. The key to a superior family and a satisfying lifestyle is understanding and using organisation and an example based on the herd system is given in social engineering [11].

Given that 'according to a study published in the journal Evolutionary Psychology, there is no significant difference in happiness levels or life satisfaction between parents and non-parents' then firstly, having children is a responsibility to the species and should be rewarded, especially given that superior children [11] are possible and that should attract a lifetime wage irrespective of other children, working, marriages etc. Having children at a young age whilst studying etc. allows for an uninterrupted career path and is in line with Palaeolithic practice. Clearly, this theory allows us to understand society and strengthen it by setting goals through social engineering.

Whitey's Worries

It could be considered that being White is a cultural blessing ['Free, White and 21'] and in current society the public servants and socialists have pushed the melting-pot multicultural society instead of strengthening the White image. The White race has pulled the world out of subsistence economies, made a better life [and made some mistakes] but is now [apparently] being taken over by Islam and other cultures through politicians' misuse of our governance system. In  terms of the survival of the fittest, as in the parable of Noah and Sodom and Gomorrah, we have turned toward selfishness and neglected our responsibility to the White race. Racism is a necessary condition to evolution [using species] and it is socialism that wants a melting pot but the concept of socialism is top-down thinking that has no rigour and produces an infinity of wrong answers. This theory has been built using bottom-up organisation from a creation equation based on relativity.

We must foster racism [as done in survival of the fittest] if we want our culture to continue and we must segregate and close borders because we have commercial enemies that use us by preying on our land, our minerals, oil etc., our productive life-blood [with cheap imports, technology etc.] and our culture [multiculturalism]. If like-cultures band together to form marketing areas then these areas become large enough to stop wars of attrition [like Ukraine] become largely self sufficient and can set racial guidelines as species in nature do. The aim is to accomplish the absolute of a strong nation with 1 culture, 1 religion, 1 goal and make everything ourselves] and the only other restriction is with marriages that must include a White [to retain one culture]. This can be accomplished easily for special government-sponsored children [11], no religious or race problems and no asset-stripping by overseas corporations. Women use to be family-centred leaving protection and production to men but the socialist government has changed the inward-looking women into outward-looking voters and the position of women has become crucial in this coming election.

Leadership

The strongest point of this theory is its completeness even to the point that it could be said to contain a God-like presence and further, that the aim of an [undefined] Second Coming is thus appropriate and [being contextual] is appropriate everywhere. Species show the fractal nature of the universe [as individuals and groups] and leaders emerge with the confidence to lead but are they suited to lead or do they just wish to lead [Dunning-Kruger effect].'A politician is typically focused on gaining and maintaining power, often through manipulation and self-serving actions. They may prioritize their own interests and those of their party over the needs of the people they serve. In contrast, a statesman is a leader who prioritizes the well-being of their country and its citizens above all else. They make decisions based on principles, values, and the long-term interests of the nation, even if it may not be politically advantageous. A statesman is respected for their integrity, wisdom, and ability to unite people for the greater good.' (thisvsthat.io) Well said, but without this theory of organisation [making completeness] how do we know where to go!

Clearly, we need a statesman [or woman] to lead but what qualification should they have, how good is the software that their mind uses in making decisions and is the goal appropriate. This theory is intended to provide the answers but how do we know the calibre of the leader? The sensible way is to use a democracy so that the leader is informed of where he or she should lead and an ability to easily change the vote if the leader deviates too far from the expected direction. Thus, a true democratic voter must be informed, able to and does vote, have a proportionate vote and can change their vote at any time. These requirements are not easily filled and ancient Greece had restrictions whereas we use a representative style that has been corrupted to the extent that the Western world is in jeopardy.

The balance of how much Socialism, Communism etc. and other opponents of the Capitalism that produces growth has no absolute [Socratic] and we need the technology to conquer time and distance to allow a true democracy. Likewise, the problem of informing voters requires technology and experts to state the case for the voter to decide. The Western democracies are in an existential fight for a Christian lifestyle because firstly, women are not having enough children [1.5 instead of 3 per woman average] to maintain the population and secondly, the selection of the fittest offspring is neglected as the population is degrading and needs organising [10, 11]. The answer in the science of governance that is introduced below.

Conclusion and Prediction

The current Australian government is accused of being the worst ever and run by Three Stooges where their fixed term has two more years to run. Street marches are ignored and public anger has led to a fringe party coming to the lead with their promise to reduce immigration and thus house prices. 'A recent report by the Institute of Public Affairs reveals the extent to which the Albanese government is committed to replacement-level immigration. The report highlighted that quarterly net overseas migration is 54% higher than the pre-pandemic average. This indicates White demographic replacement is occurring at scale and speed. It's no surprise that White patriots support the concept of mass remigration. It is ethical and normal to oppose government immigration policy that is leading to the replacement of White Australians in their homeland. White demographic replacement is also occurring in other Anglosphere nations.'

The Western so-called democracies are reaping the corruptions introduced over the last 200 years by their agents [politicians] that have usurpt the governance and this becomes obvious through the eyes of this new social engineering. Organisation, according to this theory, is half of everything and crucial in all areas and in particular firstly, the governance of the country which currently does not use formal organisation and secondly, the difficulty of effecting change as the agents [public servants] have altered the laws for their benefit. The first has been cited above to some extent and  the latter can be foreshadowed by a new science of governance.

The Science Of Governance

It is evident that politicians are worried by the rise of One Nation and have no idea of what policy to use against it in our argumentative so-called democracy nor even how to represent their donors and lobbyists because the public are concerned with culture. A good choice might be to amalgamate with One Nation under the White Australia policy that worked for a long time before it was undermined by the socialists and global big-business. Pauline has said that she doesn't want existing politicians but after reading this it is plausible that the scales have been lifted, mea culpas said and a conversion made to the benefit of both parties. This theory of social engineering is new, is a real [first-grade] science [unlike physics that is measurement and peer-review] based on formal organisation that has been published and is free 'open-access' and downloadable [6].

Formal organisation [context] is half of everything but has never been considered except separately as religion, society, history etc. [as concept] without the links that produce a simple fractal universe. We haven't realised how corrupted, miss-used and just plain stupid is our governance but now formal organisation has produced a [true] science of governance which is sorely needed because Australia is rapidly becoming a third-world country and has lost the status of the 'lucky country'. We can get this back [as can the Western countries] by using the science of social engineering to produce a true, managed, rigorous, electronic governance provided that we have the strength of purpose to overcome the extreme selfishness of vested interests.

Our governance has been corrupted by time and politicians over the last 200 years and we  need a true, managed [change-your-vote anytime], electronic [over-the-phone], fully-informed [internet] and variable vote-worthiness democracy. This is an existential election [because of the huge number of 3rd world immigrants that Labor is bringing into the country] if we want to keep our culture. The Liberals' championing of business is second-rate and led to the 190,000 immigrants [for 5% GDP growth] being against culture, religion and [for international companies] against making everything here. Social engineering can fix the population growth problem [11] and why not bring back our car industry? Globalisation is not the answer and weakens our productivity.

Clearly, in creating a strong nation a numerical picture of the policies is Labor minus four, Liberals minus four with One Nation plus four. This shows the numerics and suggests that politicians act together and show the rest of the Western Nations [that have the same problem] how to fix it. The basic problem is the lack of bottom-up organisation [this theory] with relativity [a simple fractal universe] and the physical with the women's low birthrate easily fixed [by lowering the age of mothering] using the herd system and their entitlement [11]. The case-study of the Batemans Bay Soldiers Club [6] suggests that there is $20 billion available with $2 billion a year to help out the transition of bringing social engineering to the expert-advice-level that must be available [pro and con] in a true democracy [6]. Australia was a great country 75 years ago [under the White Australia policy] compared to today [inflated property prices, the need for wives to work, inordinately expensive and over-complicated foreign cars etc.] and politicians' policy-skewings are to blame. We now have a real social science, limited options and true democracy and a new mathematics of the science of governance that derives usable alternatives for informed voters in a true democracy.

Physics uses a second-rate measuring science with peer-review agreement with no organisation and likewise for current social science but when organisational absolutes are established firstly, on the animals' social organisation and secondly on the physical, a true science is established where anything can be compared to [unchanging] absolutes [relativity]. The absolute for a strong nation is 1 culture, 1 religion, 1 goal and make everything here and the simplest summation is  +1/-1 for each of the 4 factors with the extremes of 4 and -4, as above.

Conclusion: it is indicated [by theory] and obvious [by memory] that the Australian economy has markedly degenerated [over 75 years] and a panel [a university annex] should be set up to use this theory and apply it to the governance [and the other Western economies]. The funding may be available through the gaming industry [Clubs] that needed examining [as has been done [6] versus a promise reneged on by NSW Premier Minns probably because it is easier to tax people than to manage previous stupidly concocted non-profit companies]. This theory is new but has been tried unsuccessfully before [in our simple fractal universe] 2,500 years ago when Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed when the organisation [God's word] was ignored.