Three domain names. One academic objective: Self-Governance Science

"There is one thing stronger than all the armies of the world,
and that is an idea whose time has come." Victor Hugo (H/t CH)

Note to new visitors:

This web page is advocating the creation AND formal accreditation of a new field of study in Political Science that no “rational” political scientist, or political philosopher, would be brave enough, or visionary enough, to publicly support.

The new academic discipline: Self-Governance (S-G) Science, or the study of Effective S-G Theories, Models and Strategies.

Why will political scientists not get within ten feet of this new knowledge (at least, not if they care about their standing among their peers)? Because it is knowledge that, by definition, is paradigm-shifting, status quo-disrupting, orthodoxy-overturning, and course-of-history-changing.

That kind of new knowledge is very rare in history. A few thousand years ago, for example, rational people derisively dismissed the extremely paradigm-shifting idea that Earth was round. Then, many centuries later, rational people scoffed at the idea that our planet revolved around the Sun.

But, perhaps the best example, our mid-19th century medical doctors -- who, fyi, were still using Beavis-and-Butt-Head-level-of-idiocy "remedies" to treat infections and infectious diseases, e.g., bloodletting -- initially dismissed (as medical lunacy) Louis Pasteur's paradigm-shifting, orthodoxy-overturning, course-of-history-changing theory of disease, i.e., modern medicine's Germ Theory.

So, why does S-G Sci's new concepts, theories, and "models" of S-G, belong in that category of knowledge?

By way of explanation...

We are a democratic society that has been at political/ideological (PI) war against itself for decades (some would argue generations, if not centuries), because our democratic/liberal and republican/conservative voters have, in a manner of speaking, existed in a permanent state of (bloodless) PI war all that time. (Think of election day every two years as a bloodless battle -- fought in polling stations all across the country -- between left-of-center (LOC) and right-of-center (ROC) voters.)

Our two factions of voters are waging their increasingly bitter bloodless war because, long ago most of them stopped electing candidates to represent them (in the House and Senate) and started electing “warrior-politicians” who are expected to wage their own bloodless war when they get to Washington (what we call “politics”).

Our voters elect W-Ps largely because the assumption has always been that there are two radically different, zero sum legislative policy approaches that Congress can take to solve America's myriad of economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems: those based on, or derived from, either liberal or conservative principles, values, ideals, etc.

What S-G Sci's “21st century” concept of “effective S-G” does is refute that long standing assumption with two fundamental tenets.

First: America is buried under a mountain of major EFFS problems, and our society is at war against itself, for only one reason: the two factions of W-Ps that generations of our voters have been electing to Congress, while arguably well-meaning Democrats and Republicans almost to a person – are best described as self-serving “politicians” -- meaning, politically ambitious/power hungry, craven, truth-twisting, demagogic, etc. -- who spend all of their time engaged in their never-ending, all-consuming – all's-fair-in-love-and-political-war – struggle for political power, much of which is purely for power's sake.

Second: if voters were to start keeping the House and Senate continually replenished with a steady supply of highly capable Democratic and Republican NON-warrior, NON-politicians – meaning individuals who didn't have (relatively speaking) self-serving, politically ambitious or power hungry bones in their bodies (Think: a democracy's version of philosopher kings and queens (PKQs) – the legislation these Democratic and Republican PKQs jointly crafted to solve America's major problems:

a. would be neither “liberal” nor “conservative,
b. would actually solve the problems – in many cases, completely and permanently.

It goes without saying that: 1) voters from across the PI spectrum would support the legislative agenda of these “PKQ-caliber” Democrats and Republicans, and 2) our society would no longer be at war against itself.

Now that you have a sense of what this web page is about, you are probably going to fall into one of two camps:

Camp 1: This field of study doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of ever getting accredited.

Camp 2: It truly is almost impossible to imagine this discipline's new, 21st century S-G concepts, theories, etc. ever being accepted by either our political academicians and intelligentsia – or by society writ large. BUT, that said, the only way to guarantee that it never sees the light of day is to not support this web site's effort to turn this "irrational" knowledge into a field of study “whose time has come.”

Regardless of which camp you fall into -- since most of you will have no interest in spending the hour or so it will take to digest all of this new S-G knowledge, please consider liking this page and it's FaceBook pages (and if you're "brave" enough, sharing to your social media platforms) – hoping that when enough of our society knows what S-G Science is, and the possibilities it holds for our society and nation -- it will take on a life of its own.

Then go back to doing what you were doing before clicking to this page.

Or you can reserve judgment and read on. The like button has been placed at several points along the way.

Be forewarned. Some of the material is unedited, and there will be some redundancy. And, lastly, the more knowledge -- i.e., the new concepts and ideas -- you encounter and digest, the larger your head is going to expand.

"One's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimension." Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.

"A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step."
Lao Tzu

The civic "mission" of convincing America's political scientists to embrace a new, paradigm-shifting, status quo-disrupting, course-of-history-changing field of study also begins with a single step...

like this page

like/follow
original FB page

like/follow
new FB page

@21stCenturyCivics

@EffectiveSG

Welcome to...

SelfGovernanceScience.com

21stCenturyCivics.com

535PKQs.com

3 domain names. 3 objectives.

1 academic objective: Build broad based public support for making Self-Governance (S-G) Science an accredited field of study.

S-G Science (or Comparative S-G): the study, principally, of two competing models of S-G that voters in a democracy/constitutional republic(CR) can use in their national legislative election process (NLEP) to elect the members of their national legislature.

Bloodless War (BW) Model

Strategic Cooperation (SC) Model

.
1 civic objective: Introduce a new theory of self-governance into mainstream America's marketplace of new ideas:

The Theory of Strategic Cooperation.

.
1 neological objective: Make every voter and student in America fluent in a new language -- the "language" of Strategic Cooperation -- which has been created to give form and substance to a uniquely 21st century concept: effective self-governance.

"Though no one can go back and make a brand new start,
anyone can start from now and make a brand new ending.”
Carl Bard, various

.
.
Introduction:
Answering the all-important 'why' question...
Why is S-G Science a field of study "whose time has come."?

Imagine stumbling upon an extraordinary medical device inadvertently left behind by a group of sightseeing aliens from a nearby star system. Extraordinary because, when used correctly, it can perform unbelievable miracles -- as in, every form of cancer: cured. Every kind of chronic disease: cured. Every known infectious disease: cured.

But there's more. It can also do everything from make the weak and sickly strong and healthy, and transform obese bodies into Olympic caliber physiques -- to give everyone a perfect set of teeth and reverse baldness.

It can even put a spring in everyone's step.

However, when used incorrectly, the devise produces the exact opposite result: the healthy become diseased and develop cancers. The strong and fit become weak and sickly -- the slim: obese. Healthy teeth begin rotting. Even the most optimistic spirits develop chronic depression -- and on and on.

Turns out, S-G models have the same properties. If voters in a democracy use the wrong, or incorrect, model to identify, recruit and/or elect the members of their national legislature, at some point in the life cycle of their democracy, the individuals the voters increasingly start electing to represent them and safeguard their interests will almost certainly be well meaning and sincere for the most part. But they will also desire the office they are being elected into, and the perks and privileges that come with it, far more than they desire doing what is in the best economic, financial, fiscal and/or societal (EFFS) interests of their constituents and nation.

Ultimately, it will be the three major "pathogens" of a democracy/CR -- "self-servingism," political ambition and political power-lust -- particularly and especially in its national legislature, that seal a democracy's (or a constitutional republic's) fate.

Meaning, even the strongest and healthiest democracies/CRs will inexorably become weaker and unhealthier. Small, easily solvable EFFS problems will eventually metastasize into large, unsolvable problems. This will lead to societal ills like extreme poverty, extreme economic hardship and extreme S-G disillusionment -- which, in turn, will lead to democratic institutions breaking down, citizens turning against each other, separating into tribes and factions -- and on and on until, at some point, the democracy becomes a democracy in name only.

However, should voters -- at any point in their democracy's downward spiral -- begin using the right, or correct, model of S-G to elect the members of their national legislature, the members they start identifying, recruiting and electing will have (relatively speaking) zero desire for: a.) elected office, b.) a career in politics, and c.) political power for power's sake -- and will therefore be able to (relatively) quickly: a.) make their weak and unhealthy democracy strong and healthy, b.) solve their nation's myriad of EFFS problems and fix their broken democratic institutions, c.) build mutual respect between racial, cultural, political/ideological, income, etc. groups, d.) create within all of society a sense of shared purpose -- and on and on.

S-G science is the field of study that will develop/explore/expand upon those two models.

That's why.

A layman's case for making Self-Governance
Science an accredited field of study
.

The conventional wisdom within much of our political science community is that, like every democracy preceding ours, American democracy's collapse is inevitable. For our political scholars, the only debate-worthy question is when (with the likely odds favoring sooner over later).

Why will our democracy end up failing?

Political psychologist, Shawn W. Rosenberg (University of California, Irvine), may have provided the explanation that garners the greatest support:

"...for the most part, people lack the requisite cognitive capacities for integration and abstraction needed for the kind of systemic understanding, considered judgment and critical reflection that liberal democracy requires of its citizenry."

TRANSLATION: American democracy's days are numbered because not enough of our voters are smart enough to engage in the process of self-governance competently or effectively.

Expressed graphically:

America's ~155 million voters
LOC: left-of-center
ROC: right-of-center

(too many of this group)

NOT smart enough

(not enough of this group)

smart enough

(not to scale)

On the surface, the logic behind poli-sci's conventional wisdom seems rock solid: a truly intelligent electorate would never allow their national legislature to be hijacked by what our LOC and ROC voters have allowed their U.S. Congress to be hijacked by.

Namely:

warring factions of entrenched, unaccountable, corrupted-by-power "politicians" whose members -- while sincere and well-meaning (probably almost to a person) -- are also (for the most part) nakedly self-serving, blatantly craven truth-twisters who rely heavily on every politically ambitious politician's (PAP's) most used "weapon" -- demagoguery -- to insure their repeated re-election bids and/or grow their, or their party's, political power.

What Self-Governance Science offers is an alternative, "21st century" theory, or explanation, for why American democracy is collapsing -- as well as why America's LOC and ROC voters are trapped in a part-Groundhog Day, part-Twilight Zone self-governance nightmare from which there seems no escape.

More importantly, this new field of study provides the S-G solutions our voters need to save their democracy and escape their nightmare.

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

To begin, S-G Science's takeaway is clear: American democracy isn't collapsing because most voters aren't intelligent enough to practice democracy competently.

That's not to say that our political scientists' critique of our voters' shortcomings aren't without merit. For example, it's certainly the case that a substantial majority of our voters aren't capable of higher order cognitive functioning at the level of, say, an Einstein or someone degreed in a STEM field. And an embarrassingly large number (this voter included) are woefully uninformed across a wide range of major domestic and international issues that a truly responsible, fully involved electorate would feel it their duty to have some minimum working knowledge.

And since we're on the subject of our electorate's shortcomings, we should add that America has its share of voters who are naive, gullible, apathetic -- but more than anything else, greedy, wanting more "free" stuff from Uncle Sam than they're willing to pay for in the form of taxes.

So, without a doubt, taken as a group, our voters leave much to be desired.

Here's the problem.

First, it is not our voters' myriad of human shortcomings that explain why our democracy is on the ropes.

Second, even if, for the sake of argument, we agree with Rosenberg, et al. that "...people lack the requisite cognitive capacities for integration and abstraction..." -- cognitive inadequacy absolutely, positively does not explain why our 21st century voters can't engage in the "process" of self-governance competently or effectively, any more than inadequate IQ levels explain why, for example (as was mentioned at the top of this page):

mid 19th century medical doctors used Beavis-and-Butt-Head-level-of-idiocy "remedies" to treat infections and infectious diseases, e.g., bloodletting -- and, even more idiotically, initially dismissed (as medical lunacy) Louis Pasteur's paradigm-shifting theory of disease, i.e., modern medicine's Germ Theory.
16th century astronomers scoffed at the idea that the Earth revolved around the Sun. (Heliocentrism)
1st century science-philosophers derided the view that Earth might be round.

Cutting to the chase: If what we mean by: American democracy is collapsing, is that:

our U.S. Congress is so broken, so dysfunctional as to be incapable of governing our nation responsibly or competently,
our national politics and national democratic process have both deteriorated so much (especially in recent decades) that, health-wise, their condition can be likened to stage 4 terminal cancer, and
our nation is now buried under a mountain of major EFFS problems so large as to constitute multiple existential-level threats to our national wellbeing, beginning with (at the top of a long list) the almost certain inability of most of our middle class -- in the months and years ahead -- to continue maintaining their middle class standard of living with jobs that pay middle class wages,

...then American democracy is collapsing because generations of our low and high cognitive functioning voters have been using the wrong model of S-G -- i.e., the "18th century" Bloodless War model* of S-G (a.k.a. the Beavis and Butt-head model) -- to elect their 535 members of Congress.

* derived from political science's (unwritten) BW theory of S-G, which essentially says that legislative elections, particularly at the national level, are bloodless battles between factions of voters ("fought" in polling stations on election day) over which side's "warrior-politicians" (W-Ps) get to call the shots AND control the purse strings in the legislature (minimally, until the next round of bloodless battles).

new knowledge FYI:

A democracy's voters use the Bloodless War model (or 2 Phase NLEP) when their S-G objective is to elect W-Ps to their national legislature who, once in office, will (presumably) engage in political/ideological (PI)-based factional politics, i.e., a W-P's version of bloodless war.

In America's case, in phase 1, factions of voters field, in their respective primaries, W-Ps, who will then go head to head in the general election (phase 2).

S-G Objective: the tactical objective voters, particularly factions of voters, use their votes to accomplish.
(needs improving)

key acronym → PAP: Politically Ambitious Politician

Warrior-politician (a.k.a. PAP): someone who:

is already a "professional" politician, or technically isn't yet, but wants to make a career in politics, and

typically wins election/re-election by pledging to not only passionately "fight" for his or her side's (usu. morally superior and/or beneficial) political/ideological values, principles, policies, agenda, etc., but vehemently fight against the other side's (usu.morally inferior and/or harmful) values, policies, etc.
.

Dystopic democracy (a.k.a. PAP-governed democracy):
a democracy/CR whose national legislature stays permanently controlled by PAPs.

"Power is such a dangerous thing that ideally it should be wielded by people who don't want to use power, who would rather be doing something else, but who are willing to serve a certain number of years as a one-time duty, preferably at the end of a career doing something else." Thomas Sowell [boldface & underline added]
.

re PAPs

In 21st century America, political ambition -- along with its conjoined twin, political power-lust -- should be seen as necessary evils at the local and, to a lessor extent, state levels, but 100% unnecessary evils at the national legislative level.

Based on the performance of the last 30+ sessions of Congress, it's clear that PAPs are the last people on the planet our LOC and ROV voters should be handing the reins of power in the U.S. House and Senate. So the obvious question is: why have generations of our voters been doing it?

The short answer -- seen through the lens of effective S-G:

At no point in the last 30+ election cycles (= 60+ yrs) has it occurred to our voters (or to our political scientists) that the Democrats and Republicans our LOC and ROC voters elect to Congress would be able to solve (relatively easily) America's major economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems -- in many cases, completely and permanently...

and solve them no matter which party controlled either chamber in a given session of Congress

... if our LOC and ROC voters' S-G objective was to elect non-warrior, non-politicians to the House and Senate.

new knowledge FYI:

key acronym → PKQ: philosopher king/queen

PKQ-caliber legislator (or just: PKQ): the mirror opposite of a PAP, meaning, a non-self-serving, non-politically ambitious, non-power hungry, non-politician.

key concept → effective self-governance

(working defn.): In America's case: of or relating to the ability of mainstream LOC and ROC voters to identify, recruit and elect PKQ-caliber candidates to the U.S. House and Senate -- which is to say, (mostly) Democratic and Republican candidates who possess the "purity of motive" (POM) they must possess in order to be able to jointly craft and enact into law the largely nonpartisan legislation that will actually solve America's major EFFS problems.

The Strategic Cooperation (SC) model of S-G (or 3 Phase NLEP)
(first 2 phases: SC, last phase: quasi-BW)

America's LOC and ROC voters would use the SC model (a.k.a. the Einstein model) to elect their members of Congress if their S-G objective was to keep their national legislature continually replenished with a steady supply of PKQ-caliber legislators, or PKQs, i.e., individuals willing, if elected, to serve in office for a few years -- e.g., House (4-6), Senate (6) -- as a "one-time" civic duty. But only a few years because both they and the voters understand just how easily political power (especially at the national legislative level) can corrupt even the best of us.

neartopic democracy (a.k.a. PKQ-governed democracy):
a democracy/CR whose national legislature stays permanently controlled by PKQs.

The Strategic Cooperation theory of S-G
(a layman's working definition)

Moving forward, so long as Congress is controlled by PAPs, it will not matter which political party is in power, or which philosophy, liberalism or conservatism, they govern by. The mountain of economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems America is buried under will continue growing larger.

.
However, if Congress is controlled by PKQ-caliber legislators, it will not matter which party controls the House or Senate in any given election cycle, America's EFFS problems will get solved -- in many cases, completely and permanently -- with legislation that is neither "liberal" nor "conservative," but will be strongly supported by significant majorities of Americans:

from across the political/ideological spectrum,

of every racial, religious and ethnic group,

of every age, income and educational level.

"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality." Ayn Rand

A graphic cause/effect comparison of
PAP- vs. PKQ-controlled Congresses

.
Net result of generations of PAP-controlled Congresses

.
Net result of PKQ-controlled Congresses

.

.

"Chief among the forces affecting political folly is lust for power,
named by Tacitus as 'the most flagrant of all the passions'"
Barbara Tuchman
.

"There is a lure in power.
It can get into a man's blood just as gambling and lust
for money have been known to do." Harry S. Truman
.

"Power is the great aphrodisiac." Henry A. Kissinger
.

"...the love of power is the demon of men." Friedrich Nietzsche

Two useful S-G takeaways...

Political factions in PAP-controlled Congresses endlessly engage in bloodless war, with much of the war fought purely over power:

For the party in power, to keep it, or to grow it.
For the party out of power, to acquire it.

The "collateral damage" from generations of PAP-controlled Congresses fighting their "bloodless" war: The mountain of major EFFS problems American is buried under.

Political factions in PKQ-controlled Congresses solve their nation's EFFS problems.

Two useful S-G rules-of-thumb...

In PKQ-controlled Congresses, PKQs come to work each day with their brain set to: problem solving mode.
In PAP-controlled Congresses, PAPs come to work each day with their brain set to: vacuous excuses, self-righteous diatribes, focus group-tested talking points mode.

One useful (democracy saving) S-G insight...

IF knowledge is power,
THEN new self-governance knowledge is new self-governance power.

The ultimate S-G question...

If the American people were asked the following survey question:

If you had the power to wave a magic wand, and all 535 of Congress' "politicians" would instantly be transformed into a modern democracy's version of philosopher kings and queens (PKQs) -- would you wave it?

Chances are the vast majority of America's 155 million LOC and ROC voters, along with her ~65-70 million 4th grade -- PhD level students, and most everyone else in society, would wave the wand (in a heartbeat).

Who might not wave it? The rabidly doctrinaire and most of those with a vested interest in the status quo, e.g., political cronies.

The implications raised by the survey question...

IF American society remains unaware of S-G Science and its terms and concepts:
- THEN Our LOC and ROC voters will continue to see themselves as that voter hanging from the cliff's edge: powerless to escape their S-G nightmare.
  More importantly, they will continue to be oblivious to the fact that, in terms of effective S-G, they are actually like Superman and Superwoman: able to transition America -- their America -- to a neartopic democracy as easy as our superheroes leap tall buildings.
IF a critical mass of American society become aware of (= fluent in) the language of Strategic Cooperation:
- THEN the question will not be if our voters make the transition, but how quickly.

* * * * * * * * * * * *

In a nutshell, these are some of the reasons you should support Self-Governance Science becoming an accredited academic discipline.

For now, that simply involves liking this page, its two Facebook pages and/or Twitter page (as well as sharing it to one or more of your social media platforms).

"If you want something you've never had, you must be
willing to do something you've never done." Unknown

If you want to see Self-Governance Science become an
accredited field of study, "you must be willing to do
something you've never done."

like this page

like/follow
original FB page

like/follow
new FB page

@21stCenturyCivics

@EffectiveSG

In the near future (hopefully mid April), the fundraising effort for a national education campaign will be finalized, at which point you can contribute to the campaign's advertising effort, or help pay for YouTube and powerpoint presentations, or to upgrade this website, etc.

What follows are a number of observations, thought experiments, back-of-the-envelope ideas, etc. re this new field of study.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

imagining the unimaginable

The following thought experiment -- and the questions it spawns -- may be the fastest, easiest way for our society -- especially our political scientists, civics teachers, students and voters -- to get their brains around the idea of PKQ-controlled Congresses.

Please note: The new category of legislative policies highlighted in this TE is not intended to be a policy prescription, per se, but simply to provide our society's best and brightest thinkers and problem solvers -- particularly those in public policy -- with a new, apolitical/non-ideological (ANI) lens through which to view both the origin of America's EFFS problems, and their legislative solutions.

The most important of S-G Sci's "21st century" thought experiments*

* may qualify as the most thought provoking, most “new knowledge” spawning, and longest titled thought experiment of the 21st century.

The
U.S. Congress Consisting Of One Passionately Liberal Philosopher King
And
One Passionately Conservative Philosopher Queen
Thought Experiment
(a.k.a. the Two PKQ Congress Thought Experiment).

To begin, let's imagine that America's voters wave a magic wand that instantly turns our two chamber, 535 seat Congress into a one chamber, two seat Congress – one seat permanently reserved for a passionately liberal philosopher king, the other for a passionately conservative philosopher queen (with both recruited, then elected, by the people for, say, one 6 year term).

Let's call them PKQ-caliber legislators, or PKQs for short, which makes them the mirror opposite of the self-serving PAPs who overwhelmingly dominate both political factions in Congress.

To make our two PKQs even more exceptional, let's give both of them the:

intelligence of an Einstein,

wisdom of a Solomon,

compassion of a Mother Teresa,

mettle of a King T'Challa,

pure logic of a Mr. Spock,

ingenuity of a MacGyver,

vision of an Elon Musk,

moral compass of a Nelson Mandela.

Finally, our PKQs' genetic profile mirrors our general population: in round numbers, roughly 61% white, 18% hispanic, 13% black, 6% asian, 2% other.

BRIEF DIGRESSION:

We now essentially have what some political philosophers have called the best possible form of government (given our species' many human flaws and shortcomings): a benign dictatorship. In our case, it would be a benign co-legislatorship (bound by our U.S. Constitution).

aside: Plato and others in history would have called this governing setup an aristocracy of philosopher kings and queens (in our case, one of each) -- which, fyi, Plato considered the most perfect or ideal form of government possible.

Since our two PKQs are not "privileged" in the way we would normally think of a ruling aristocracy, it might be more instructive to also categorize this form of government a benign co-legislatorship. One that issues its decrees in the form of legislation jointly crafted by our philosopher-legislators -- which they then wisely assign our Executive Branch the responsibility of implementing and enforcing.

FYI: this is the Legislative/Executive Branch relationship our founders hoped the Constitution would accomplish -- because the last thing they wanted to see was the President of the United States becoming an Imperial President (which, fyi, is exactly what an unbroken chain of craven, responsibility-phobic, PAP-controlled U.S. Congresses allowed to happen starting a long time ago).

Back to our PKQs. Since both of our PKQs have to vote for any legislation for it to become law -- and since one PKQ is passionately liberal while the other is passionately conservative -- any legislation they craft must not offend either PKQ's ideological values or principles.

From this thought experiment, a number of questions come to mind:

Question 1.

How many of America's major economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems can our PKQ-controlled Congress solve with legislation that doesn't offend the ideals and principles of liberalism or conservatism?

Answer: Essentially, all of them, principally (but not solely) via a new legislative policy formulation process (which will produce new "categories" of legislation).

One notable formulation process begins by our legislators (perhaps with the help/involvement of grade school, high school and college civics classes around the nation) systematically going through the hundreds of thousands of pages of legislation enacted into law by all 117 current and past Congresses (= 230+ years).

Then, relying on hindsight, common sense, Einstein-level intelligence, Solomon-like wisdom, etc., begin legislatively nullifying every piece of "self-serving" legislation -- but most notably, every self-serving legislative provision inserted by every PAP who has ever served in Congress -- which, fyi, is a lot of PAPs.

For the time being, let's focus on the legislative provisions, and call them dysfunctionalizing legislative provisions (DLPs).

Here's an instructive way to visualize their accumulation over time...

.

Why the term: dysfunctionalizing? Because, at some point, it should become apparent that DLPs, which one could reasonably estimate number in the hundreds of thousands -- PLUS the tens of thousands (?), hundreds of thousands (?) of bureaucratic rules and regulations that were directly or indirectly created as a result of the DLPs -- are responsible for dysfunctionalizing America's major systems:

free market system

healthcare system

financial system

public education system

social service system

criminal justice system

mental heath system

immigration system

etc.

FYI: there are a number of ways to think of each individual DLP.

For example:

As a tiny wrench thrown into the gears of one or more of our major systems. One tiny wrench, too small to notice. Hundreds of thousands(?)/million(?) of wrenches (= dysfunctionalized systems).

As a serving of simple sugars or trans fats added to an otherwise healthy meal. One meal, no problem. 200 years of sugar and trans fat laden meals = major systems suffering from chronic "diseases."

And the "symptoms" of the diseases: America's major EFFS problems.

As a very small explosive devise set off inside or outside a skyscraper. One explosion here and there, manageable. After 200+ years of unrepaired explosions = heavily damaged structure, electrical system, plumbing system, etc.

see following "DYSFUNCTIONALIZED SYSTEMS" graphic.

In cause/effect terms, our dysfunctionalized systems:

(a.) are the link between DLPs and the lion's share of our major EFFS problems:

(b.) go a long way toward destroying the Democratic and Republican parties' respective political/ideological (PI) myths re where America's major EFFS problems come from:

The Republican Party, and hardcore conservatives, would have us believe they come from...

The Democratic Party, and hardcore liberals, would have us believe they come from...

Self-Governance Science's apolitical/non-ideological (ANI) TRUTH

They actually come from...

Moreover, DLPs help explain not only why so many of our problems seem so intractable, so impervious to painless AND relatively inexpensive legislative solutions, but also why generations of our liberal and conservative intelligentsia (in academia and think tanks, especially) have been arguing ad nauseam the same "talking points" re which political party's policy solutions -- e.g., broad based tax cuts/fewer government regulations vs. higher taxes for the "wealthy"/ increased government spending on the poor -- have hurt vs. helped our economy, economic growth, unemployment numbers, etc., etc., etc...

PAP Created Problems (PAPCPs)

(Figuratively speaking) PAPCPs account for 99% of America's EFFS problems, and (literally speaking) explain why PAP-controlled Congresses represent an existential threat to America's EFFS wellbeing -- and, eventually, to American democracy.

Back to DLPs...

The concept of DLPs opens the door to other 21st century insights as well, for example, why our free market system isn't even remotely free, or fair -- or why "predatory capitalism" is so dominate -- since DLPs are the means by which the last 230 years of self-serving PAPs in Congress have engaged in the wholesale practice of various forms of legalized corruption -- i.e., government created and/or sanctioned "unfairness" -- e.g., special interest-, vested interest-, and political cronyism (e.g., patronage, (cushy) no-bid government contracts, etc.).

It's important to note that making our nation's free market system truly free and fair will not, in and of itself, rid America of all its EFFS problems. It is, after all, just one of many of our major systems in serious need of substantial repair by PKQ-caliber legislators (think: extensive "de-dysfunctionalization" agenda).

But "optimizing" our economic system will get us well down the road to that highly desirable, easily achievable objective.

.
Systems de-dysfunctionalization and optimization:
piece of cake
or
massive nightmare (with major societal pushback)?

Will de-dysfunctionalizing (in some cases) and optimizing (in other cases) the many moving parts of our nation's major systems, be a piece of cake, legislatively speaking, for our PKQ-controlled Congresses?

In some cases, it probably won't. But in a great many cases, absolutely yes. That's because our national legislature will have a few things going for it -- starting with the fact that they won't be beholden to any special interest group(s) save one: America's 320+ million people.

That means, among things, that in their search for legislative solutions, they will have a free hand to draw upon the sum total of all planet Earth's economic, financial, fiscal and societal/sociological "knowledge."

Meaning, they will have a wealth of economic, financial, etc. data from dozens of major nations going back, in some cases, centuries.

aside: This is where IBM's Watson et al., plus big data algorithms, might be especially useful, e.g., correlating specific elements of legislative policies around the world to see which produced net beneficial vs. net harmful outcomes.

Equally (if not more) importantly, PKQ-controlled Congresses will have what no other national legislature preceding it has had: the trust, faith, respect and support of the vast mainstream of our LOC and ROC voters – along with the rest of society as well.

Bottom line takeaway: our nation will be 100% behind our PKQ-controlled Congress' efforts to undo the damage done to our nation's major systems by generations of PAP-controlled Congresses.

(Brain Exploding) Food For Thought

If we define an optimized free market system(FMS) as one that produces the greatest material AND non-material good for the greatest number of people -- then we determine that, to be 100% optimized, 90% of our FMS's "moving parts" must be 100% libertarian, and 10% must be 100% socialist:

How would we classify that FMS?

What impact would this have, in epistemological terms, on the centuries old political/philosophical debate: which governing philosophy, liberalism or conservatism, produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people?

Question 2.

Let's assume that a small but critical mass of our most civic minded LOC and ROC voters decide to begin using social media, along with standard recruitment "tools and methods," to identify, then aggressively recruit, PKQ-caliber liberals, conservatives, etc. in advance of the Democratic and Republican primary processes.

First, what kind of qualities, skill sets, etc. will our voters be looking for?

Answer: In terms of general skill sets and abilities, the same kind that both the public and private sectors look for to fill their mid- and upper level executive positions.

Namely, someone:

with an excellent formal education,

intelligent enough to be able to digest and synthesize large amounts of oft times complex material,

with a demonstrated body of general knowledge acquired over decades of meaningful life experience,

who has achieved a level of economic and financial success is life,

with demonstrated leadership and life-and-death decision making experience.

For determining the candidates' moral/ethical "qualifications" -- a standard background check will probably suffice, e.g., interviewing friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc.; level of community involvement, amount and kind of volunteerism, charity work, etc.

To determine the candidates' "purity of motive" (POM), our voters will probably agree that, by definition, the POM of anyone who has ever served in political office, or wants to make a career in elected office, will be LOW/ZERO. Everyone else's POM will be HIGH.

Second, will our voters discover that individuals with these particular skills, abilities, qualities, etc. are extremely rare? Somewhat rare? Not rare at all?

Answer: while an exact number is clearly out of the question, if we conservatively guesstimate a range of as few as 0.5% (one out of two hundred) of America's ~250 million adults, to as many as 5% (one out of twenty), there are between 1.25 -- 12.5 million Americans who qualify as "PKQ-caliber." In raw numbers, even at 0.5% that's a lot of people (almost 2,900 in each of our 435 congressional districts).

That's enough to keep Congress overflowing with a steady supply of highly capable liberal, moderate, conservative, etc. PKQ-caliber legislators for well over ten thousand years* (about 14,000 years to be exact).

* assumes the maximum time served in office for our 100 Senate and 435 House members is six years.

Fourteen thousand years. ** pause to let that fact sink in **

ASIDE: Knowing that (in raw numbers) our nation is literally awash with PKQ-caliber Americans -- but devoid of them in our U.S. Congress -- brings to mind a wonderful line from an outstanding Kathy Mattea song,

"...standing knee-deep in a river and dying of thirst."

Question 3.

How can a Congress controlled by "amateurs" -- i.e., legislators who are not "professional" or career politicians -- run a nation as large and complex as America?

Answer: First, it should be obvious that Congress doesn't "run" America (thank goodness). Our nation is "run" by tens of millions of Americans distributed throughout:

dozens of major federal agencies

50 fully functioning state governments

thousands of county, city and other government bodies, and

millions of:

businesses

community and social organizations

school boards, churches

charities, etc.

Next, just a reminder, PKQ-caliber legislators will be among the most intelligent, most educated -- most knowledgeable -- and most accomplished members of our society.

They will NOT be, as some might fear, erudite academicians who will rule from high atop Mt. Olympus, divorced from the reality of everyday life; blindly indifferent to the daily plight of the unwashed masses. America's voters, unwashed or otherwise, wouldn't give such people the time of day, much less recruit them to run for our national legislature.

Next, PKQ-caliber legislators will have what no other generation before us has had: the sum total of all human knowledge at their fingertips (or, rather, their smartphones). IBM's Watson, Alexa, Siri, and other forms of artificial intelligence will be at their beck and call. Add to that the wealth of "flesh-and-blood" knowledge, experience, wisdom, expertise, etc. that will be at their disposal in our federal agencies, our many think tanks in Washington and around the country, our universities, Silicon Valley, our business sector, etc.

Finally -- Ayn Rand's sage observation bears repeating:

"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

Let's face it, if the collective we, i.e., LOC and ROC Americans, don't solve our PAP-controlled Congress problem, our PAP-controlled Congress will end up destroying our democracy.

It's that simple.

Question 4.

It is all but impossible to get high quality candidates, much less PKQ-caliber candidates, to run for Congress. So why should we expect to see sufficient numbers of PKQ-caliber candidates suddenly start stepping forward?

Answer: Most won't step forward, they'll have to be arm-twisted via social media -- or "recruited" via traditional recruiting methods. But they will agree to "run" because, like the vast majority of our society, they will want to see our nation's major EFFS problems actually get solved** -- (this bears repeatedly repeating) in many cases, completely and permanently -- not kicked down the road, or papered over, or "solved" with wack-a-mole legislation, i.e., solves some problems in some areas at the expense of creating other problems in other areas.

** re solving our major EFFS problems...

2nd Thought Experiment

Let's assume that all 155 million of America's LOC and ROC voters are able to gather around a vast kitchen table for the purpose of coming up with the best possible/most optimal solutions to all of their nation's major EFFS problems.

factoid: the table will be over twice Earth's diameter.

Let's also assume that the vast mainstream decide to not allow the conversation be hijacked by either side's rabidly ideological voters.

Is it likely or unlikely that substantial majorities in both groups of voters will:

want to solve the problems?

understand that some problems will not have "easy" solutions?

be able to work together in good faith?

trust each other's good intentions?

be willing to compromise?

come up with "best possible" and/or "fairest possible" solutions?

(In my view, likely on all counts.)

Is the following a valid, or reasonable, prediction?

When enough of our society becomes fluent in the language of Strategic Cooperation, the concept of SC will quickly become "mainstream" (and monetizable) -- at which point, it will no longer be a question of if, but when our academicians, national media, cable news, talk radio, general public, civics students, etc.

STOP

mindlessly parroting our PAP-controlled Congress'

liberal-centric vs. conservative-centric

(EFFS) policy talking points,

and START

comparing and contrasting

PAP-crafted vs. PKQ-crafted legislative solutions

to America's major EFFS problems.

The science of effective self-governance
is radical science, but it is not rocket science.

like this page

like/follow
original FB page

like/follow
new FB page

@21stCenturyCivics

@EffectiveSG

"The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge
but imagination." Albert Einstein

"All truth passes through three stages:
First, it is ridiculed; Second, it is violently opposed;
and Third, it is accepted as self-evident."
Arthur Schopenhauer (attrib)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Strategic Cooperation theory of S-G bears
repeating because it is an imaginative S-G "truth"

So long as Congress is controlled by self-serving PAPs, it will not matter which political party is in power, or which philosophy, liberalism or conservatism, they govern by. Over time, with rare exception, America's EFFS problems will continue to get larger, or more severe, or both.

However, if Congress is controlled by PKQ-caliber legislators, it will not matter which party controls the House or Senate in any given election cycle, America's EFFS problems will get solved -- in many cases, completely and permanently -- with legislation that is neither "liberal" nor "conservative," but will be strongly supported by large majorities of America's liberals, moderates, conservatives, libertarians and social democrats.

Food For Thought: Clearly, the idea that a significant number of America's voters not only could but would willingly learn how to practice democracy effectively or competently is a mind boggling idea to say the least.

Which is great news since it is because of mind boggling ideas, which includes:

paradigm-shifting ideas,

status quo-disrupting ideas,

course-of-history-changing ideas,

...that our species has gotten to where we are.

With Self-Governance Science, America's LOC and ROC voters will soon possess the "mind boggling" knowledge they need to take the logical next "evolutionary" step in the way a free people engage in the process of self-governance.

“If you control the language, you control the argument.” George Orwell, 1984
.

With just the handful of new terms and concepts you have encountered, our political scientists, and other political thinkers/problem solvers in our society -- as well as our middle-, high school and college students -- will be able to begin asking, and answering, entire new categories of questions.

Sample questions:

How much of America's extreme:

poverty,

income inequality,

social discontent,

racial strife,

rich vs. poor animus,

political/ideological tribalism,

etc.

...exists because America is a PAP-governed democracy?

How will America's "democratic process" change when voters begin viewing:

our myriad of EFFS problems in PAP vs PKQ terms, and

our NLEP in PAP- vs. PKQ-controlled Congresses terms?

What kind of macro- and micro-social and other changes would we expect to see occur, especially among our younger generations -- and how quickly would they occur -- if America's 535 national legislative role models were no longer PAPs, i.e., pontificating, finger pointing, responsibility avoiding, craven, demagogic, constantly demeaning the other side's values, principles, motives, etc. -- but were PKQ-caliber legislators?

What kind of legislative policies could (and would) a PKQ-controlled Congress craft and implement that a PAP-controlled Congress couldn't?

How many of those policies would be overwhelmingly supported by voters from across the political/ideological spectrum? (Hint: all of them.)

How many of those policies would actually solve the EFFS problems they were enacted to solve? (Hint: for all intent and purposes, all of them.)

What is the likelihood that a PKQ-controlled Congress will be able to actually (collectively) legislate and carry out their government oversight duties with the:

intelligence of an Einstein,

wisdom of a Solomon,

logic of a Mr. Spock,

compassion of a Mother Teresa,

mettle of a King T'Challa,

ingenuity of a MacGyver

vision of a Steve Jobs

moral compass of a Nelson Mandela,

common sense of a Mark Twain

(Hint: very likely)

What is the likelihood that PKQ-controlled Congresses will result in America's "Imperial Presidency" going the way of the dinosaurs.

(Hint: 100% likely)

Which answers are more "instructive?"

21st century America's EFFS problems were caused, created or exacerbated by:

political ideologies/governing philosophies, or

generations of legislation crafted and enacted into law by self-serving PAPs.

21st century America's EFFS problems will be solved by:

political ideologies/governing philosophies, or

legislation crafted and enacted into law by NON-self-serving, NON-PAPs (a.k.a. PKQ-caliber legislators).

TRUE or FALSE: Particularly at the national level, a well meaning politician with political ambitions is a politically ambitious politician first, and a well meaning human being an astronomically distant second

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

re Political Ambition

There are roughly half a million Americans serving in some form of elected office, most of them at the local level. A useful operating assumption is that, not all of them but the vast majority initially ran for office, not because they had political aspirations or they craved political power, but because they constitute that tiny minority of individuals in every democratic society who actually get off their butts and offer to perform what are often times the largely thankless tasks that have to be performed to insure that the many gears of a community (and a society) that are essential to their successful functioning don't stop turning.

(Because when enough gears stop turning, civilizations stop being "civilized.")

That said, within this group of well-meaning, well-intentioned individuals, there is no doubt a small(?)/ substantial(?) percentage who, once in office, experience the perks and privileges that came with their position. And however small or minor those perks may be, they are enough to turn the elected official into, by definition, a "self-serving politician." Meaning, their desire to get re-elected will corrupt their decision making -- perhaps ever so slightly in some cases, considerably in others.

Regardless of how much, it's likely that a significant number of these elected officials will get re-elected simply because they run unopposed -- because no one else wants the job.

The reason for pointing out this commonsense observation about human nature is to underscore the larger takeaway:

political ambition should be seen as a necessary evil at the local and, to a lesser extent, state level -- but a 100% unnecessary evil at the national legislative level.

.
* * * * * * * * * * *

re America's political role models

What most stands out about essentially all of Congress' PAPs -- even the most well-meaning of them -- isn't pretty.

They are skilled in the art of demagoguery.

They pander to their base.

They are adept at avoiding responsibility for bad/unpopular outcomes and quick to take credit for good/popular outcomes.

Given the size of our national debt, and annual budget deficits, it is obvious that, with rare exception, PAPs are fiscally irresponsible and blatantly unaccountable.

PAPs resort to personal attacks, questioning the other side's honesty, integrity, motives, agenda, etc. if it is politically expedient for them to do so.

especially the case if their re-election is in jeopardy

When questioned by reporters, PAPs have no qualms about:

pointing the finger of blame at anyone and everyone except themselves,

not answering questions that might reflect negatively on them,

obfuscating, e.g., providing such mangled answers that no one knows what they said or meant.

Our nation's children and students grow up watching PAPs act like, well, PAPs -- i.e., finger pointing, quick to blame, bloviating, pompous, etc. Equally damaging, our youngest minds watch our PAPs' armies of true believers (and well-paid believers) in cable news, academia, national media, think tanks, Hollywood, etc. viscously belittling and disparaging the "other" sides' policies, motives, integrity, etc.

As a result, our children and students naturally assume that, contrary to what their parents, teachers, etc. may be preaching to them, this is "normal" behavior for people who disagree with each other on issues large and small.

The harmful (direct and indirect) ripple effects of this are almost impossible to calculate.

Suffice to say, a good case can be made that our nation's overall social behavior, attitudes, value systems, "character," etc. are all extremely unhealthy -- or diseased -- thanks to the unethical behavior and actions of literally generations of unethical PAPs in our nation's national legislature.

That's why, as a society, we are profoundly more:

rude... crude... loud... greedy... envious... dishonest... angry... resentful... judgmental... self righteous... etc.

...and profoundly less:

thoughtful... conscientious... respectful... principled... courteous... peaceful... generous... civil... altruistic... resourceful... stoic... goal oriented... civic-minded... community focused... etc.

...than we would otherwise be.

Of course, what that also means is that when America's 535 role models are selfless, PKQ-caliber legislators, we will find our society -- especially our children -- quickly emulating the behavior of PKQ-caliber legislators.

Meaning they will quickly become profoundly LESS:

rude... crude... loud... greedy... envious... dishonest... angry... resentful... judgmental... self righteous... etc.

...and profoundly MORE:

thoughtful... conscientious... respectful... principled... courteous... peaceful... generous... civil... altruistic... resourceful... stoic... goal oriented... civic-minded... community focused... etc.

"One's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimension." Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.

like this page

like/follow
original FB page

like/follow
new FB page

@21stCenturyCivics

@EffectiveSG

ABOUT

Name:	Montie Rainey
Profession:	Retired home builder. Advocate of Self-Governance Science
Education:	BS, Mathematics and Computer Science (University of Illinois at Chicago, 1984)
Misc:	Opinion columnist, The Jackson Sun (2005-2010)
Contact: