Step one on the path to democracy thinking: The choice between democracy or monarchy is not an either/or decision because they are not opposites. These are two entirely different ways of thinking. Where we choose to put our focus makes a huge difference. Choosing the path to democracy will first make life 2x, then 4x, then 8x better. But choosing the path to monarchy will first remove half of our options, then half of what’s left, then half again until we grind to a halt.

In this article I take a deep dive into political history, defining Direct Democracy 1.0, Greek Democracy 1.5, Representative Democracy 2.0, Constitutional Democracy 2.5, and Iroquois Democracy 2.9 to help explain what is emerging as Democracy 3.0. You can choose to use versions 1.0, 2.0, or 3.0 according to whatever fits, but while any organization can use Democracy 1.x, most organizations will not allow Democracy 2.x, which is why I think Democracy 3.0 has a better chance

Are majority vote and consensus the only tools of democracy that you know? The array of democracy techniques available to modern organizations is much more expansive than classical Democracy, and orders of magnitude better than the techniques available to the Founding Fathers of U.S. Democracy. "...most people dread the outcomes of voting... so we sit in angst waiting for the results..." In this article I provide new definitions of democracy, monarchy, and leadership, and

I've been thinking a lot about the impact of politics on organizations, our jobs, and our lives. Maybe you too? Some of the reasons why might be obvious. It brought me back to thinking about the origins of democracy and the origins of monarchy. What problems were they each intending to solve? How effective have they each been? Is one better than the other? And what should we do next?