COS- The Iron Rice Bowl. Part 1.

Background.

We live in a highly competitive world and the major struggle today is in finding the better idea, the better solution. And in our collective wisdom we believe that the democratic process is the way forward. For that to happen we need to have better communication, better and higher quality debates without the use of intimidation and lies.

Chess is a good simulation. We have the highly competitive conditions but without the real world consequences of failure. So in my mind it is good practice ground for our kids before they enter the real world.

But what are we seeing in our chess today? We have seen 30 plus years of slipping further and further behind but we do not even allow our kids to explore new chess ideas without being attacked. We do not allow our officials to discuss new ideas without sacking them devoid of any grounds. Any healthy debate need proper structure and rules.

Now this is the problem. If we cannot achieve proper structure and process in chess where the problems are much smaller than in the real world, then our chances of solving real world issues would be that much slimmer.


MCF under ROS.


Under the ROS system, all the members belong to the State Affiliate directly. And the State Affiliates collectively vote in the committee of MCF. In this system the members have a say. If the members feel that the officials are not functioning properly, they can be voted out by the members directly in the AGM of the State Affiliate. This is a healthy system which encourages both the members and the officials to stay awake if they want progress. Check and balance and healthy competition. And then the State officials go to vote for the National officials that they want.

Just like how we should choose our players. So there can be challenges. Different ideas and different methodology can be tested. If it doesn't work, then it can be replaced by fresh blood, fresh ideas.

It's also selection, not only of players but also for the officials who have fallen asleep or is no longer working for the chess community but for themselves. So healthy challenges should be encouraged.

We didnt join chess to teach our children to be samseng, I'm sure. We came into chess to make them smart isn't it? To reason out issues, to discuss, not to be intimidated nor to bash up someone because they see things differently.

We allow healthy competition to weed out the weaker ideas isn't it?

Next. MCF under COS. I hope to show that this system could be designed so that once a lousy official is voted in, he/she cannot be removed. It may be designed so that we have another 30 plus years of slipping even further behind or until the official retires from boredom or something similar. Institutionalised no new ideas or fresh blood and no competition. Just like our chess currently.

Question: The game of chess is designed so that the better idea wins. So why are our organisations being structured differently? And why is our chess culture so against new and modern ideas? Is that the way to the GM?