7. Do you think that the reality that was presented with “PANAMA” and “PARADISE” and “PANDORA PAPERS” is acceptable? With this revelation it becomes clear that millionaires around the world hide their income in “tax heavens” to avoid taxation and contribution to the common good, leaving the common people, the daily workers in the hell of everyday life, to pay for the operation and security of the state ...MORE
  • A. It's legal, therefore justified and acceptable. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B. It's not fair, but this is how the world works and unfortunately there is nothing we can do. 33%, 1 vote
    1 vote 33%
    1 vote - 33% of all votes
  • C. It's unjust and immoral and definitely needs immediate treatment, so that the injustice is stopped and such phenomena are not repeated again. In a world where critical security and justice services are underperforming, in a world of unemployment and hunger, such accumulation of wealth and concealment and avoidance of obligations, is absurdly unjust and disgusting, and the world community must take care to eliminate it immediately, even if many world leaders will be personally affected. 67%, 2 votes
    2 votes 67%
    2 votes - 67% of all votes
  • D.Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
January 3, 2023
Polls Archive

Journalists from all over the world worked together to uncover one of the worst realities in our lives. So they managed with difficulty, anxiety and risk, even for their lives, to reveal the PANAMA… PAPERS.

The leak of the names of the "Panama Archives" caused great concern to the "powerful" and the rich of the whole planet, as among the names were many heads of states, many businessmen, bankers, public officials, journalists, footballers, singers, actors and even rich people from illegal activities of common criminal law. And all these millionaires hid their income in the tax heavens, in order to avoid taxation and the contribution to the common good, but also to hide amounts that could not justify their possession by legal means.

One of the leading journalists in the shocking revelations of the Panama Papers scandals, the Maltese Daphne Garuana Galizzia, was brutally murdered in Malta, apparently as an example.

But people have shown that in the name of liberty and justice they do not even count death. A few days after her assassination, new revelations, new names of kings, prime ministers, presidents, companies, millionaires hiding their precious treasures in financial paradises, as pirates once hid their booty boxes in secret places, in some remote deserted islands and drew maps so they could find them again. Millions of such new "maps" were leaked after the continuation of the investigation of the global network of journalists (ICIJ) and this time they were named "PARADISE PAPERS".

Such is the power of people, that a man alone could change the course of the whole world! One alone could discover or invent something so important that would help or even save all the people on earth, while another, with a wrong pull of the trigger, could deprive the world of the previous man/woman, or with the wrong push of a button, could destroy humanity and the entire planet. After all, destroying is much easier than creating! You do not need special skills to kill a human "diamond", even a human "garbage" can do it.

This was the tragic result of the revelations. Instead of making people in every corner of the globe rise up and take the immoral ones with stones, the murders of journalists continued. They who were doing their sacred work, wanting to make the world a little better were hunted. One after another, journalists investigating global corruption were tragically killed, including 27-year-old Ján Kuciak, who was found dead with his unfortunate partner in their Bratislava apartment and sweet Victoria Marinova who was first raped and then brutally murdered in Bulgaria, but also many others around the world, most tragically of all the Saudi Jamal Kasogi, who was cut into pieces while he was alive in Saudi Arabia's Consulate in Istanbul and his dismembered body was scattered and never found!

The meaning that some people wanted to pass on, is that in order to become a star of journalism, one has to tell the news which will not bother the kings of wealth, while the real stars, the right and incorruptible journalists, went out unprotected. But it is a great pity that some people risk everything and sacrifice themselves to reveal the truth and in the end nothing substantial "comes out" of all this and no one is corrected.

The ICIJ recently revealed and the "PANDORA PAPERS" one of the largest lists that once again demonstrates the dimensions of global corruption. "So what, another list!" one could say!

How many more "PAPERS" must be revealed and how many journalists must be sacrificed, so that some measures can finally be taken. But by whom? Once again it becomes clear that there is no universal justice. Because no matter how fair all the states of the world are, if there is even a small spot on the planet (like the tax haven of the Cayman Islands) that remains out of control and outside the rules of law, then there will find refuge, the injustice of the whole world.

If there was anyone who could and should once again intervene in such global issues, it would be the UN with it’s organs, the International Court of Justice and the International Monetary Fund, but once again they are absent and once again stood below the circumstances.


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


8. Do you think that information and journalism are reliable and free? Do people learn the truth globally, or do we think that our information is a bit one-sided and relatively directed? Are we protected from fake news or is it easy to be seduced by inaccuracies and fabricated misleading news that lead to false impressions of the world?
  • A. Yes fortunately journalism is free and trustworthy. We are learning the truth and I am very satisfied. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B. Nothing is perfect. In general, things are satisfactory. We learn what we should, I wish the information was even better but it is not in our hands. Maybe something should be done with the fake news on the internet, which are reproduced without appearing to be a joke or satire, but misleads the world giving it the wrong impression of the world, but who can do anything? 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C. No, I'm not satisfied. I often consider the information one-sided and directed. The media are not really independent, as they are rather dependent on government subsidies and grants and the support of other powerful financial interests. On the internet things are chaotic. Everyone says and writes whatever they want, since there are no implications for fake news and there is no valid assessment of the credibility of each website, things that should be coordinated globally. The most tragic of all, however, is when important issues that are deliberately hidden and are not in the interest of powerful people and circles to be revealed, come to the surface. Then begins a chase against journalists that can go as far as their physical extermination, to intimidate and exemplify the rest. But this is ultimately the most important news that people need to know to understand what is happening in the world and what needs to be done. Information is a function, it is a primary social project for a better world. There can be no proper democracy, justice and security if we have a wrong picture of the world we live in. If we do not know the truth, we live in a lie. Much needs to be done on a global scale to protect the freedom of the press and journalists, but also to protect people against false, arbitrariness and misinformation ...MORE 100%, 4 votes
    4 votes 100%
    4 votes - 100% of all votes
  • D. Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 4
January 11, 2023
Polls Archive

COMMENTS No8 ARE THE SAME WITH QUESTION No7 (look at “MORE” previous question) AND CONTINUE HERE …

In Greece, journalists Socrates Giolias and George Karaivaz were murdered outside their homes. From the deadly ambushes they set them up, they received both dozens of shots and bullets, so that the killers make sure that they will shut their mouths forever.

The killers unfortunately remain unarrested and organized crime is not endangered by their reporting.

Only we are in danger of never learning what we should have learned, in order for this world to get a little cleaner and instead we learn things that we don’t need and that make our minds sleepy and lazy.

The UN, shocked by the global scale of the phenomenon, decided to act. So they established with the decision of the general assembly of the organization, as a world day to end the impunity of crimes against journalists, on November 2 of each year!

But what will we do? We will wait every year for this day to celebrate the memory of the unjustly killed heroes of our time or every day we will fight with them for a better today and for a better tomorrow?

...................................................................................................

Another example of "unpleasant" revelations is the case of 26-year-old journalist Roman Protasevich, who was traveling from Athens to the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius, when his plane was forced to land in Minsk, where he was arrested.

Greece strongly condemned the act of "state hijacking" on the flight Ryanair FR 4978, which operated the route Athens-Vilnius, forcing it to land in Minsk, Belarus, endangering and temporarily put hostage a total of 171 passengers, in order to catch a journalist who publicly opposed the President for 17 years of Belarus, Lukashenko.

The charges against him included organizing mass demonstrations, disrupting public order and inciting hatred, for expressing his views and transmitting-spreading the violent repression of protests against the President of Belarus, on suspicion of falsified election result and allegations of arbitrary arrests, torture and ill-treatment.

The course of events has shown that the suspicions and the information must have been well-founded.

But what is the intervention of the world community. Where is the protection of freedom of expression and freedom of the press? Isn't that our issue? Is it a problem of the Belarusians and the world community has no reason to intervene? Let them solve it themselves and let a few thousand people be killed?

If a president abuses his office and turns the Republic into a Monarchy, then who will help the people who may have been deceived or may suffer or fear, if not the rest of humanity by ensuring at least the fairness and integrity of the electoral process?


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


14. Are you satisfied with how democracy works in your country? (Note that the most important role of democracy is the enactment of fair laws and their application in everyday life so as to satisfy the sense of justice, in the reward of good and the worthy, and the feeling of right in the punishment of evil and unjust). Specifically, do you believe that there is justice in the most basic part of everyday life, which is the financial? People are paid properly according to their work and pay their due taxes analogically, so that you could say that there is justice in the distribution of wealth in your country?
  • A.Yes I’m satisfied. Everything works just fine. If any problems arise, they are solved by state interventions and democratic procedures. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.No, I am not satisfied with the Democracy and the distribution of wealth, because the Article 23 of human rights is not applied, where everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work, nor does everyone contribute to society, according to their income, but we can’t do anything, that's life. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C.No, I am not satisfied and I believe that Democracy needs many corrections-improvements because the feeling of Justice is not covered. I believe that some people are favored and some are wronged. Tax evasion and contribution evasion are not controlled as they should be, with the result that hard-working and productive people cannot meet the living needs of a proportionally quality human life, unlike some who are like superhumans, earning disproportionately large sums, which far exceed the needs of a luxurious living and the security of a human life (perhaps and the descendants of entire generations), accumulating so much wealth that it leads not to a proportionately better quality of life, but to the corruption and alteration of human characters and values. Humans must do something about it... 100%, 3 votes
    3 votes 100%
    3 votes - 100% of all votes
  • D.Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
February 26, 2023
Polls Archive

The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


15. How free and independent and autonomous is the power of justice in your country? One of the three powers whose distinction is a fundamental principle of democracy! Do you believe in justice in your country and that everyone can find their own right, regardless of their political beliefs, social status and financial-economic situation?
  • A.Yes, I am satisfied and I have confidence in the justice of my country. I believe it is not influenced by political, economic, personal or other factors and justice is done. It is indeed independent in both its mode of operation and its decisions, like the executive and the legislature powers. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.So and so. It is independent but it needs a lot of improvements, such as in the delivery (time period) of justice. I hope they will do it. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C.No, I do not consider Judiciary power to be independent, but dependent on the executive political power. Unfortunately it receives a lot of influence from the rulers and finally acts as an understaffed public service under the government, obviously ineffective as the decisions are delayed for years, leaving those who are illegal to walk free and others who seek to find their right are waiting. / Justice does not function as one of the three recognized powers that must be independent and self-sufficient. The members of the executive and the legislature powers are elected, while the highest officials of the judiciary are not elected, but they are chosen and appointed by the respective government. This in itself shows the dependence of Justice, which accepts influences and interventions that can sometimes even influence decisions. / Independent and equal judiciary like the legislature and the executive cannot exist when the leaderships of the highest courts around the world are placed and appointed by Governments. What should be done at least in Greece…MORE 100%, 3 votes
    3 votes 100%
    3 votes - 100% of all votes
  • D.Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
February 28, 2023
Polls Archive

The supreme judges should be elected by the strengthened majority of Parliament and not appointed by the respective government and the respective prime minister or president or governor.

Judicial evaluation processes should be improved so that the best are elected to sit in the highest courts and exercise the sacred function of this power.

I believe that Justice should be strengthened immediately and to the fullest. Financially, in human resources in infrastructure, in advanced electronic recording processes and in everything else it needs, in order to reach the level it deserves, as one of the main powers and forces of humanity. It is unacceptable that in trade and economic transactions the procedures run the fast track, while the procedures for the administration of justice remain stationary.

Protection must also be ensured from the interference of powerful political and economic actors, who may seek to influence court decisions for their own benefit, sometimes wanting to advance the outcome of the trial aiming at a desired outcome and at other times by creating obstacles.

Unfortunately, the field of justice is full of windows, wide open, half open or slightly open, from where powerful law firms find the power to intervene in the operation way, using every possible means, legitimate or unfair, to ensure the victory of their client. Sometimes they find a way to intervene in the selection of jurors, sometimes even in the selection of the judge, while some would not hesitate to use professional false witnesses.

Unfortunately many times the outcome of a certain trial can be different, depending on which judge is sitting in the courtroom. That means, each judge can adjudicate a case in a personal way, as if the Divine Trial could have many different views.

Unfortunately the mechanisms of justice cannot control possible well-funded (professional) witnesses, since there are no electronic systems to cross-check their reliability and solvency.

Unfortunately, many witnesses are afraid to testify in court, because the witness protection process has not yet evolved and automated and the result is that many prosecution witnesses of criminal organizations or powerful illegals are found dead one after the other, when they do not simply give in to blackmail.

Unfortunately, many honest Judges are blackmailed and feared for their lives, and while they should be the most protected people on the planet, there are not a few who have been sacrificed in the performance of their duties.

Finally, I believe that justice must have a say in serious social issues, through its elected representatives.

At this point Cosmovote wishes to pay tribute, honor and glory to the unbreakable and incorruptible judges who come first to our minds and all the others who passed from this world, giving hope to all the rest of us, that there can be justice on Earth. In their memory we pray so that they are forever, eternal and bright examples for the next ones.

Anastasios_Polyzoidis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anastasios_Polyzoidis

Georgios_Tertsetis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgios_Tertsetis

Giovanni_Falcone https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Falcone

Paolo_Borsellino https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Borsellino


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


16. What does it mean to Abstain from the electoral process (when one does not go to vote at the local and national elections) and why is it usually so high (sometimes more than 40%)?
  • A.They are people who work all day, disabled elderly people, people who are hospitalized or due to other serious obligations, they justifiably cannot go to vote. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.It clearly means indifference. If someone abstains from compulsory voting, while he is not justified, it means that he does not care who will govern his country and himself and how. This is because although voting is mandatory by law, the serious penalties provided for have never been implemented! It's the blind eye phenomenon! When we and the state look elsewhere and do not see a law that exists, then it is as if it does not exist! 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C.It is a protest attitude. Apart from the justified indigent and anyone who is disappointed or angry with the parties and does not want to see them or hear about them, they do not go to vote. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • D.It is a combination of A, B and C and therefore the abstention rate is very high. Unfortunately, this percentage cannot give clear conclusions for the voters. It may even be someone who is simply bored of getting up from his couch. However, it is certainly wrong for some to believe that this is how they can show their discomfort, considering the abstention as a protest stance, because this is expressed only with the White vote./ Unjustified abstention means indifference and normally (since voting is compulsory) everyone who unjustifiably does not exercise his electoral right-obligation, even with an invalid vote, even with a blank vote(protest), even with an empty envelope, with the presence that says I came, I am here, I participate but I have nothing to say cause I am disappointed or angry, should have a consequence… "the deprivation of the right to vote for the immediately following election process"! If someone thinks it's not that important to go vote, they won't mind too much!/ In fact, even those who work or are ill could and should vote as much as possible, (if the elections were held electronically) so that the abstention rate is as low as possible./ Voting in human is a highest good, right and obligation. 100%, 3 votes
    3 votes 100%
    3 votes - 100% of all votes
  • E.Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • G.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
March 8, 2023
Polls Archive

The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


17. Do you know what White-Blank Vote means and what do you think about its usefulness?
  • A.It means that someone is not aware of politics and does not know who to vote for. Maybe it's useful for statistical reasons. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.It means that someone cannot decide, but whoever comes out will be fine. What we call a white check. It's not so useful, maybe it should be canceled. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C.It is clearly a vote of protest, opposition and dissatisfaction that expresses the judgment of the voter who wants to say: "I don't think any of the candidate parties are fit to govern alone and apply what they want to all areas of our lives, because I don't agree with everything a party stands for"./ It is an extremely useful tool that was initially introduced as a vote of protest and challenge for the candidate parties or even the political system, but then it was weakened and devalued obviously because all political parties cannot believe that there could be someone who is not covered by the options offered to him. The white vote was abandoned to ambiguity and uselessness ending up in the same basket as invalid votes, but we should clarify and reassess its meaning and significance … MORE… 100%, 3 votes
    3 votes 100%
    3 votes - 100% of all votes
  • D.It is just a trick of the prefecture and the role of the white vote is to strengthen the first party. It is useful for enhanced analogy and party autonomy. It must be abolished because this way the first party will not be strengthened. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E.It means absolutely nothing and everyone votes White-Blank for their own reasons. Obviously this is a mistake of the system since the White-Blank ballots are just counted and included together with the invalid ones. It is a mistake and should be canceled. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • G.Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • H.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
March 10, 2023
Polls Archive

White-Blank votes will count when the number of people who uses them will be newsworthy and could not be ignored.

People do not have a voice to speak and the only case they are trying to be heard is through elections. Then they try to send some messages and on that day voters must be given the opportunity, at least once every four years, to say what they really want.

Unfortunately even then, the words we have learned to use are too few and they do not make good sense. Green, Blue or Red party is a very small vocabulary.

Don’t we have to consider that we have grown up, that we have matured and that we have to learn other words too, so that we can express what we really want?

When none of the parties and their leading figures, inspire confidence in the voter that they are ready and able to take over the government of his country, then what should he vote for?

Shouldn’t the voters have this option and the people the opportunity to express their concern or dissatisfaction, even if they never want to use it? But if they do shouldn’t we know what would happen?

WHITE and BLANK must become ONE UNIVERSAL WORD easy to understand meaning.

On election days or rather nights, there are no losers, there are not even winners, there is only the verdict of the people and we must respectfully try to listen to it, decode it and interpret its will and possible fears.

In order to make this happen, the meaning and the importance of the White vote for the citizens and politicians should be clarified and all the people should know and agree that the White Ballot clearly means only one thing, and that’s it "I do not want any of the candidate parties to rule alone" and also to find out what could happen if a large percentage of voters voted White!

For example, if there is no autonomy of the first party and White gets a lot of votes (more than the party that would ally with the first to form a coalition government) or even for the extreme scenario that the White vote would get more than the first party! (Even then they would be counted together with the invalid ones?)

At least in these cases, politicians and citizens should agree that all parties should govern together, forming a government of national unity based on simple proportional representation, in order to look for possible mistakes, better positions and to work together to improve the system.

Only in this way the White Vote will finally be able to play the role for which it was established and the work for which it was intended.


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


18. Are you satisfied with the electoral system? Do you agree with all the pre-election positions of one party or you may like the position of one party in the economy and another party in foreign policy and maybe another party in education and labor? Would you like this to be reflected in the election result and to implement the will of the people for every sector of human life, or you are satisfied with the implementation of the overall wish of one political party?
  • A. Yes, it satisfies me. One party covers my choices and there is an identification of views on all objects-issues of everyday life and full agreement with its proposals for all areas of human activity 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B. No it does not satisfy me but nothing better can be done. It's utopian and not worth the effort. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • C. No, it does not satisfy me at all and something must be done. /It is not possible for one party to have the best positions on all issues and it is most likely that two different or more parties have better proposals for different issues! /I am not satisfied with choosing the one with the most preferable suggestions, instead of being able to choose the best suggestions for each area of life. /In order for this to be reflected in the elections, we would have to vote for each position on each item separately, instead of voting for one party collectively, as if one party had all the best proposals. Finally, each party with the best position in a sector of human activity should take over the respective ministry for its implementation. Our political leaders must find a way. Nothing is impossible… MORE… 67%, 2 votes
    2 votes 67%
    2 votes - 67% of all votes
  • D. Not sure or no idea 33%, 1 vote
    1 vote 33%
    1 vote - 33% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 3
March 18, 2023
Polls Archive

The decisions we make determine our lives. The point is to find how we can make the best decisions we can.

And the best decisions are the ones that are accepted by majority. That means by voting, with democracy and not by monarchy or oligarchy or tyranny, regimes that were tried and did not prevail.

But since it is not possible for everyone to vote for everything, we vote once every 4 years and we choose "theoretically" the best among us, so that they can implement a specific program and make these decisions, through a smaller model of proportional voting and again through the majority.

But these presuppose the existence of consciousness and the freedom of its expression.

However, at the level of elected leaders while voting in the parliament, the voice of conscience does not exist or rather is not heard. What is heard is the position of the party president, who determines the line of the party and under the excuse of party discipline and unity, along with the threat of deletion or other consequences, everyone agrees. Sometimes the parliament members are not even informed what they are voting for, an assurance from the competent minister is enough to convince them to vote.

Unfortunately, the political parties that are not an integral part of the functioning of Democracy do not function democratically! Democracy could function without parties, simply by electing the best individual representatives.

Just because someone belongs to a party does not mean that they have to agree with the party on everything and that when they disagree they should be treated as a foreign body or as a deserter.

Nowadays, the image of the infallible party has been created and politicians have confused "making the right decision" with "being able to vote for what we want" apparently under the illusion that they are infallible.

But is anyone infallible? Does anyone claim perfection? Mistakes are for humans and they are the actions that the smart ones do not do again but the idiots repeat.

…………………………………………………………………………………………..................................................................

The parties claim that if the first party does not have the autonomy needed to vote for what it wants and if it cannot pass a bill (a law draft), then there is a risk that the government will fall.

So under the pretext of not leading to anarchy and chaos, the law of enhanced proportional representation is applied, to favor the first party with more MPs so that it can carry out its work undisturbed. This is where non-elected MPs are appointed while the elected are rejected.

But how can a government lose a majority in parliament? Proportionality doesn’t change!

That is like, if in a family a father proposes something that the rest of the family does not want and in the end this is not done, then the father should disappear!?

If a government is not autonomous and proposes a proper bill that has been approved by the people it will not be voted on? Who will not vote for what the people have chosen? And citizens cannot judge? There will be no elections again?

But if it is autonomous and proposes a wrong bill, what will happen?

Unfortunately, the simple analogy, that is the true choices of the citizens in conjunction with the vote of conscience are not considered as a solution, because it is supposed to be like governing by an elected minority, which will determine by completing the required number of votes to pass (approve) the bills.

Here we are constantly discussing party power, party prestige, party collaborations and we continue to believe that everyone agrees with everything and there is no talk of differentiation and the conscience of the elected MPs.

To the mind of a man who in his life has not found any other man who agrees with him on everything, this sounds scary. Even with dear friends and relatives there is always the opposite view.

………………………………………………………………………………………..................................................................

This totality of the parties' disciplinary agreement on all issues is terrifying because it brings to mind other periods in history where the opposite view was feared and could even lead to death. Some call today's Republic… Elected Monarchy.

At best this system that has been imposed on our lives, the impersonal political parties (political companies) looks like party oligarchy.

But one could say that nothing different can be done from what is already being done! Suppose then, that the enhanced proportional system has its advantages in the occasion that a leading party has a clear lead and stands out from the other candidates in order not to be blackmailed by a minority.

But what happens when even with this premium electoral system a party cannot form an autonomous government?

Again, the leader of the first party is called upon to work with one or more party leaders to form a government! Again, however, the election is not proportional and based on voting, but based on the desire, the will, the judgment and the interests of one, instead of two, instead of three people parties.

Why, at least in this case, should not depend on the real desire of the electorate, since in this case, it seems that the people do not distinguish one extremely suitable for the leadership of the country in relation to the rest!

So why is he called upon to form a government with some other minority parties, who are probably just thirsty for power, as long as they outnumber the rival party and just make it useless?

After the appointment of MPs we also have the appointment of government parties. How is it that in this case the parties cooperate, while when they are not under the pressure of their small percentage they cannot let their members cooperate to achieve the best possible result?

And yet this has happened many times in the past when no party has achieved autonomy and when there has been a need to achieve a serious goal.

Then solidarity appears, Ecumenical governments are formed, governments of cooperation and wide acceptance in which all the party political formations of the country participate.

………………………………………………………………………………………......................................................................

But the selfish gene of the parties wants everything to be its own. Only when they risk getting nothing, they manage to cooperate.

It would be great if we lived in a perfect world and in all future electoral contests there would be suitable personalities and political figures for all the citizens of the world to inspire confidence, to deserve their vote and to gain the autonomy they so desire.

But perfection does not exist and if it exists it is only in what we mean, when we say in different languages God, Θεός, Dieu, Allah …

Parties urgently need to understand that they must accept democracy within themselves, respect for diversity, the conscience and belief of the people, abandon the arrogant behavior of the infallible, seek the best solution and cooperate with each other.


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


19. People in the elections vote secretly so that they are not blackmailed or criticized for their opinion, while the Members of the Parliament (MP-congressmen) vote openly. Aren’t they blackmailed, aren’t they pressured, aren’t they judged by the parties to which they belong? Should the Members of Parliament also vote secretly to protect themselves, so that they can vote conscientiously, instead of being forced to obey the party’s commands?
  • A.No, MPs have great power and will and do not need the secret ballot. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.No, MPs should not have the right to secret vote, because they must obey the instructions of the party line. 50%, 1 vote
    1 vote 50%
    1 vote - 50% of all votes
  • C.Yes they should vote secretly, because many times they may be forced to vote something obeying the party line or thinking about the political cost, instead of voting by listening to the voice of their conscience. However, the concept of democracy is based on the beliefs and conscience of the people. If all elected MPs obey the orders of their leaders, then it ceases to be called democracy and is a form of elected monarchy. If again a Member of Parliament is persuaded to vote on the basis of what his party thinks the voters believe, then we are talking about a hypothetical democracy. What each MP votes should be a secret, it should be a purely personal matter and no one should make assumptions or raise suspicions or blackmail or even ask. Because all we have to care about is the total number of votes based on what the Members of Parliament believe, who have been elected based on what the citizens believe. 50%, 1 vote
    1 vote 50%
    1 vote - 50% of all votes
  • D. Not sure or no idea 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • F.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 2
March 24, 2023
Polls Archive

The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.


20. Do you think that for extremely important issues-problems that have not been foreseen (predicted) in the pre-election positions (commitments) of the parties and that arise after the elections, creating doubts, divisions and conflicts in the societies, the opinion of the citizens should be consulted (asked) or the elected government should decide as authorized?
  • A.I believe that the elected government should decide on all issues, because it has the mandate (command) of the people to do what they think is right on every issue. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • B.I believe that the opinion of the people should be consulted. I do not consider the elected government authorized for everything and I believe that along with the right information, alternatives should be given and the people should decide by electronic referendums. It is wrong for an elected official to be considered or rather to consider himself infallible and empowered by the world to make decisions on any critical emergency that may arise… MORE… 50%, 1 vote
    1 vote 50%
    1 vote - 50% of all votes
  • C. Not sure or no idea 50%, 1 vote
    1 vote 50%
    1 vote - 50% of all votes
  • D. Not interested 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
  • E.I don't want to answer this question. 0%, 0 votes
    0 votes
    0 votes - 0% of all votes
X.Other
Total Votes: 2
March 24, 2023
Polls Archive

When in an emergency-unpredictable situation you cannot convince of the necessity and just of measures and decisions, so that they are consciously accepted, you must impose them with fear and punishment. But the unjust measures or those that do not convince the people, bring denial, anger, outburst, uprising.

At least when there is public opinion, this is an indication of fairness and a consolation that comes from respecting the opinion of many. Otherwise it seems like arbitrariness, like a latent democracy.

A person's beliefs are not a joke, they are the person himself. Only when convinced, someone is obedient and cooperates. Anyone can respect fair laws, but not the opinion of governments that think they are expressing the public opinion.

The procedures should be modernized and done electronically, like direct-urgent referendums, to cost less, to have ease, transparency and to ensure the integrity of the process. As it happens with paying taxes and online shopping, so that it is done quickly, there is cross-check of data and fraud is prevented, so the investigation of the desire of the people could be ensured!

Democracy must become an evolving and self-improving system, otherwise it will end up like a museum, like Acropolis and Parthenon that you can only imagine the glory and the beauty they once had. Even the issue of elections, those with paper ballots must end and be modernized. Let us not forget that in ancient Athens the secret ballots were done with shells (fragments of pottery) but fortunately things evolved and we reached the electronic age.


The results of the voting do not represent the common opinion of the world or all internet users, but they carry the weight of the opinion of the number of people who voted in Cosmovote. When end if, a large-proper number of people vote in Cosmovote, then we will be able to claim that the voting represents the common opinion of the world.