Meta-theory of political Will and Self-organization (MWS)
The Meta-theory of political Will and Self-organization (MWS) combines several psychological theories to get answers to the question, what kind of processing and conditions a person or a politician needs for conscientious and self- or human rights-congruent voluntary decisions and actions. Thereby, MWS proposes two fundamentally different functional modes of consciousness or action modes. Whereas the first one is more eligible to find proper goals and adequate self-congruent solutions – the second mode of consciousness is more suited to efficiently execute decisions and to consequently finish tasks and to accomplish the a priori set goals.
MWS further describes the functionally opponent characteristics of these states of minds, that are referred to as either a democratic or dictatorial action mode. The democratic action mode is characterized by a holistic, reality-oriented bottom-up monitoring of one`s needs and goals by means of a pluralistic mapping of the intensity of inner voices and an unbiased thinking in probabilities for goal-related success and failure. In contrast, the dictatorial action mode is characterized by a top-down reductionist and realization-oriented state of mind, with an exclusive black-or-white and object-oriented thinking in favor to the prioritized goal or an authority, while other self-relevant needs, non-goal-relevant thoughts and inner voices are suppressed or ignored.
Additionally, MWS proposes that a real democracy requires a specific constellation and congruence between natural psychological and social/political structures of finding common goal and rules (legislative) and between psychological and political processes of goal attainment (executive) to convey free and conscientious discourses, decisions and actions. As a result of analysis of the structural forms of actual, collective decision making with quality-unspecific majority votes, it becomes apparent that no transparent, needs- and quality-oriented democratic structures and processes actually exists to formally practice a pluralistic, holistic and tolerant democratic decision making, nor self-organization.