Cooperation Nation Station

Co-operation Nation Station Home Page

                                                                                         July 2008

The Purpose of this site is to anticipate simple all-good institutional standards of a consensus building project for those who advocate within public groups and to enhance cooperative thinking and being that aims for greater social realization of community potential and worth. The idea is to benefit those who seek to improve their understanding and support of people who make a meaningful contribution to the lives of other people, to organize people who have the potential to make a meaningful contribution to the lives of other people, or to help those who never had the chance to make a meaningful contribution to help the lives of other people through the introduction and use of six timeless pragmatic, intellectual, and emotional standards for political, social, religious and economic persons, organizations and groups that aim to respect autonomy and dignity of the person working toward the goal of cooperative self-government.

The six pragmatic, intellectual, and emotional standards can be used to organize respect for the autonomy and dignity of the person within our public shared community with a view toward direct advocacy and self-government. The unique feature of these standards are that they are exhaustive of all operational principles involved in grassroots or public advocacy decision-making that involve the legitimate intervention of public groups. Historically there have been many formulations of standards for use in public domains but these essential standards are the simple undeceived easy-to-understand version. The result of ten years of research, divine revelation and communication with God, the author presents these ideas with the knowledge that such a formulation is the end of learning vis a vis the most general and specific public standards necessary to protect respect for autonomy and dignity of the person. Although the content of these categories has yet to be set by debate and technical applications of conceptual understanding, the essential aspect of each category weighs issues of clarification for the purposes of communication and serves to permanently separate issues of clarification. 

The six standards are anti-violence, anti-incompetency, anti-poverty, anti-prejudice, anti-pollution, and anti-false.

The value of producing the opposite of bad standards of judgment that governments cannot fail to agree over through the approach of informed consent to name preventions that counter even loose definitions of pragmatic, intellectual or emotional forms of false information, violence, incompetency, as well as community problems of poverty, prejudice, and pollution. People who engage in advocacy and self learning will soon discover that greater understanding of conceptual knowledge is a benefit through popular recogition of pragmatic, intellectual, and emotional contributions and preventions that protect expressions of safe and good or necessary practises that represent an exhaustive theory of general common values that convergences for those who participate and bargain within public institutional or grassroots organizations that engage in advocacy or public speaking. These six standards are broad but they do not fail to monopolize less specific or more general versions in use for self-directed projects or community improvement for organizations that otherwise might be absent standards that at a minimum respect the mental autonomy and physical dignity of each person. We ask for favouable recognition of charity and hope for further publication of these six standards for the benefit and agreement of common use for clear-sighted goals designed to resolve policy conflicts within grassroots and public advocacy forums or other self-directed projects. 

Set within the context of John Stuart Mill’s observation that the only legitimate form of government intervention is in the protection of our citizens, an equivalent modern formulation sets out the limit of public action: We must agree to defend each other from each other, or recast, we must agree to protect each other from each other, and provide the mechanism for self-government to produce the result of the six standards within this legitimacy framework.

Beyond the above formulation, these standards are independent of specific or self-interested versions of political association but can be recast as essential elements of a democratic nation state and/or recast within further contextual levels of classification. For example, the six standards correspond to categories that protect, liberty, public law, health, education, environment, and communication within the context of public forms of government and could serve to generally clarify priorities and spending categories of taxpayer money. The meaning of these standards creates implications for government and expectations of society insofar as our collective social organization is governed by rational rule based authority that should not reject ethical imperatives but rather generally converge on universal forms of principled social regulation.

“Responsible people joined together, gathering resources to teach through demonstration and begin planning a better future.”

Whether you organize where you work, live, or at places you socialize, or whether you dwell on interpersonal relationships or political discourse - a duty attaches to speak well in the public arena through the adherence of principles of direct advocacy that represent standards of respect and potential. Such advocacy is essential for the protection and performance of our capacity to self-govern in our collective quest to achieve responsibility that is the source of legitimacy and the origin of the right of self-determination and the call for progress toward self-governance for populations within democratic nation states.