ECONOMIC and SOCIAL STRUCTURES

Levels of government, distribution of Wealth

There are major economic incentives for building larger and larger social structures. In addition the political power structure must develop multiple layers as the empires grow in size and numbers of people. This pyramidal structure has typical distributions of wealth, or perhaps mal-distribution is a better description.  Those in the bottom layer are the producers, and they directly create most of the wealth, but this wealth is distributed such that the upper parts of the pyramid receive more than they do. These "supervisory" levels also contribute to the creation by their mental and directive efforts, and by increased quality of life from artistic and other services. The structures follow 7 distinct patterns which also match the 700 year social cycles in sequence. The letters are shifted starting with N so as not to be confused with the A,B,C letters in the 700 year cycle.

N. FAMILY UNITS (one level, the basic minimal social unit)

People at the most primitive level operate in small family units. They use hunting and gathering to survive.  In these small units there is virtual political equality of all adults, and while a male usually dominates the females, there are Polynesian cultures where the females are dominant. This male dominance is true in all primates.  Simply the males are bigger and stronger, and assert this strength.  They live in a world where might makes right, so the females seek the protection of the males. Usually there is one particular leader, the "alpha" male, in his prime. As he ages he may be displaced by younger, stronger males, but elderly males also remain in the family unit with changed status. Their experience makes them valuable, they are the teachers adn repository of knowledge. The females choose their mates, within limits,  but only the prime males are eleigble. She can leave any time the situation does not suit her. They choose to stay or stray for security reasons. But females with children usually remain since the insecurity of change is life threating to her and even more to children. These groups are virtually extinct now, with the possible exception of a few tribes in the Philippines and in South America. We also should probably consider the family units of monkeys and Gorillas when we try to imagine mankind at this stage.

O. TRIBES - CHIEFS, two levels of "authority"

This second stage consists of several family units, usually closely related, forming a tribe, and usually with a clear tribal chief. This also is a hunting and gathering culture, and can be found in the Kalahari of Africa or the Bushman of Australia. The Chimpanzees and Baboons also use tribes. They increase their productivity about 50% by specialization.  The males hunt, the femalse with children are less mobile and tend to stay closer to camp and gather. The efforts are frequenly directed by more experienced leaders,  and this experience factor probably increase the productivity as mentioned by at least 50%.  By pooling over abundance from one hunter's family unit, with poor or even a missed hunt from another sub unit everyone benefits. The big kills produce so much that the one family could not use it all anyway so they loose nothing, and gain security. Also this opens up the possibility of a group hunt which is usually more fruitful than individual efforts.  This period also opens up the possibility of preservation and storage of excess foods, but this is minimal at this time since they still are nomadic and can not move large quantities of food.  The leaders usually demand and consume up to 50% more than the average member, but the total productivity is such that the individual is about 1.4 times better off than they would be alone individually.

P. VILLAGE or TOWN CULTURE (three levels in the social units)

This consists of a collection of tribes, or families, and usually has a council of chiefs, with one major political figure who I will dub "Mayor" or "Lord" of the village. In Mesopotamia this leader was called the "Patesi. The very word village generally implies a settled agrarian existence.  This need not be completely true since several nomadic cultures with this complexity and political system have existed, particularly on the steppes of Russia and in Mongolia. Still the fixed agrarian town is more typical and more numerous examples exist. They may occupy a cave or cleft, and the Mesa Verde culture is a good example of this. In Mesopotamia the local flat terrain and absence of caves led to "artificial caves" in the form of mud waddle and daub houses.  The land in the immediate vicinity was cleared and planted for grain and vegetable crops. Major use of food preservation and storage was common, and animals are domesticated.  This is a pastoral existence, and hunting still supplements the domestic animals.  Particularly when the shepherd is out with his flock and has a target of opportunity is the food supply enhanced by hunting.

   This culture allows about 2.3 times the productivity of that an individual would produce. The overall productivity is up perhaps 50% from the previous tribal culture. The leaders do consume more, but the individual benefit in available "wealth" increases about 1.4 times the tribal stage or 1.76 times individual family culture. Thus there is an obvious major incentive toward this small "city" culture.

Q. The CITY STATE - The first of the Kings. (four levels)

The fourth stage is a "city state" with one major city dominating the other village which are about it.  This city is ruled by a minor "king" or other "nobility" such as Lord, Earl, Baron or in mesopotamia  called Lugal, in Egypt Nomarch, keeper of a major district centered on a fortified city, frequently in later times centered on a castle. This is typical of many of the early Sumerian city states circa 3500-3000 BC.in 700 year cycles C & D. In Egypt this also falls in cycles C & D. This is lost in antiquity in China since the first good archeological evidence occurs in the next stage of full kingdoms about 1700-1500 BC.in cycle F & G.

   Within the city trade buildsup, goods can be swapped. There is a "villiage fair" or town market where goods can be exchanged.  This allows further specialization. Potters make pottery, weavers make cloth, one farmer can grow grapes, and make wine, while another grows grain. That grain also can be used to make beer in a brewery. The shpeherd tends his flock of sheep, selling wool and mutton; while the dairy farmer raises cows, makes cheese and butter. By specialization each produces more quantity of wealth of better quality. By swapping each obtains a better variety of this better quality material than they would obtain if they had to do everything themselves. Everyone shares in the rewards.

   Each fruit grows in its proper season, so a system of values is instituted so that a person can enter into the bookkeeping system what he grew in his time for goods to be provided later by other people. Thus writing is necessary and the bookkeeping system occurs. This allows one person to enter into a common "granery" items that can be storered for reasonably long periods of time, receiveing a craft for delivery at a later time.  One of the earliest itmes to be stored was grain in pottery jars. Olive Oil, and dried fruits also were kept. A bureaucracy developed to storre such goods in time of plenty against famine - literally the Biblical tale of Egypt and the seven years of plenty followed by seven years of famine. This storage of value also gave reason for theft, and a need to defend the "bank" against thieves and maurading bands. This requires an army and police force.

   The total productivity increases again by roughly 50% over the previous stage, to a total of 3.3 times that of the individual, in the family setting. The bureaucracy and government consume some of that, but the individual is perhaps 2 times better off htan as an individual and this is up form 1.76 times that value in the previous stage. The "rich" nobility at the top of the pyramid now have of the order of 8 times as much wealth as the basic level and are about 4 times better off than the average peasant or worker in this civilization.

R. The KINGDOM the first "STATE" true "KINGS" (five levels)

The fifth stage involves a collection of city states united into a nation.  There is one unquestioned central government usually under on hereditary KING, who controls from a minimum of 4 or 5 to and average perhaps of 20 as a typical number, to as many as 40 or more city states.  This political ruler in Mesopotamia took the title of "King of Kings", and in Egypt with the unification of Upper and Lower Egypt the Pharaoh placed each of the roughly 20 "Nomes" of upper Egypt and 20 Nomes of lower Egypt or sub districts under a Nomarch answerable to him.

    Thus the pyramid cal structure has a King of Kings and his court at the top, the Nomarch or local ruler of a district including a major central city and its surrounding towns and his "tax collectors" and officials are in the second tier; the village "mayors" or town chiefs and their few officials in the surrounding villages make up the third tier, and then the local clan of extended family  and family units working the land at hte last lowest level.

    In Europe this top man was a King, and the feudal nobility with Counts, Viscounts, Graff, Earls, Dukes, and Barons who controlled major tracts of land. The towns had their own government, and this dropped to the  local "Lords" who controled manor houses and smaller land sub-divisions were the local "chiefs" and finally the workers in their own farms and cottages are the bottom - productive - layer. The rest tend to be parasitic on the workers. However they also do provide some useful even necessary services.

   There is another further increase in productivity by organizing the labor into groups where appropriate.  There is an increase in the are from which trade is drawn and the variety of specialization and higher quality resultant from this continues to increase. A typical result is 4.4 times individual effort, up from 3.3 in the four stage system by about 30%.  Note this increment is not as great as in prior stages.

Wayne County, Michigan are virtually identical for example. Los Angeles or New York City in fact have more people and political power than most counties, so the distinction may blur a bit at this level.  The smaller cities such as Gallatin the county seat of Sumner Co. with a Mayor would fit into the  P level, and then the social structures of churches etc. will fill the 0 niche of tribes or chiefs, as well as ward or precincts, in political power. Finally the family as always is the basic structural unit of social structure.

The economic pyramid in an Empire has 6 levels, one more than the table above shows. This is because the lower or base subsumes the two smaller levels, i.e. family and tribe, in t he base of the pyramid. This is shown below for a typical example for typical wealth real generation of 5.5 times individual (25% growth from R) and for the "break even" example of 7.5 units of value which is required to increase the income and standard of living of the base workers relative to the prior pyramid.  Note that the top is "getting rich" with more than ten times the income of the base workers.  This burden is what causes this to be a degenerative case. There are two possible cures:- 1) to cut the fraction of parasites in each layer, flatten out the pyramid, or 2) to cut their pay. The pyramid also is much too tall and narrow with too many middle managers  (mostly Parasites) at each intermediate level. This is shown from observation. A better "flatter" pyramid would be formed with 180, 45, 15, 5, 1 by tolerating no less than 3 people being supervised by each supervisor above each level, INCLUDING all staff at each level. This would solve the problem totally. This is very much to the interest of the tax payer. It is NOT to the self-interest of the bureaucrats who build political empires to increase their status and pay.

    Level                                       base                   3                          4                       5                           6

    Population                                9                      7                          5                       3                          1

    Distribution                         36%                   28%                      20%                  12%                     4%

      By level

    Distribution                         11%                    17%                         24%                   29%               19%

       of value

    Real Value                              1.68                   4.6                        6.7                       13.9                 27.9

       5.5 units

total

    Real Value                              2.3                     4.6                        9.0                       18.0                 36.0

    7.5 units

    total

Table 21 Distribution of Wealth and Population for a

Typical Stage S "Empire" of Six Levels; Showing the

Expected and Necessary Wealth to Increase the Standard

of Living of the "Base" Two Levels of the Social Pyramid

94

In the above, note that 36% of the population effectively produce most of the wealth, and even most of the services. A government in general produces nothing tangible. It, at least in theory, does provide services. But the "governmental sector of 64% - roughly 2/3 of the total population

-    receive about 16 times the value that the workers receive!  To put this in persepective the workers in the U.S. are relatively well paid by world standards and assumig $20,000 per year for an average person,  the President (or other "managers" make 16 times that or $360,000 a year. In reality here are distributions in both social classes.

The workers range from perhaps $5 hour or about $10,000 per year to many automobile workers making above $40,000. Thus the $20,000 is in the middle. On a world basis this is far too much,  most workers make much less than this.   Marx was absolutely correct when he said that this disparity between  contribution and distribution   leads  to  social revolution.  If each was rewarded by their contribution to the wealth, by their production, the pyramid could not rise so steeply at the top. Note again that the worker is actually WORSE off than in the prior more local control case.   Only if the total productivity (including services) increase to 7.5 times individual productivity does the worker break even. That seems unlikely, thus the only real option is to trim the fat and fatheads, and clip out all the middle "management" paper shufflers who in reality do not contribute to production, or provide real USEFUL services.

                                               .                                                                                                           .

    Level                                               base                        3                       4                   5                       6  |

    Population                        I              180                      45                     15                   5                1       |

    Distribution                                       73%                   18%                    6%                2%             0.4%  |

Idealized                                                                                                                                                        |

    Population                        R               61                     29%                   12                   5                       1  |

    Distribution                                       56%                   27%                  11%           4.6%                0.9%  |

Realistic

    Distribution I                                     11%                   17%                  24%              29%                 19% |

    of value                             R               27%                  26%                   22%             18%                7.1% |

    Real Value                         I               2.66                   5.3                     10.6                21.2                  42.6|

    4.0 Units                           R              1.92                   3.87                7.75                   15.5                  31.0|

            (if 5.5)                       I               3.66                  7.32                  14.6                   29.3                  58.6|

            (if 5.5)                       R             2.66                   5.33                 10.6                 21.3                  42.6|

Table 22 Distribution of Wealth and Population for a

REDUCED or Flattened  S "Empire" Pyramid of Six Levels;

The idealized & More REALISTIC(underline) populations are

shown to slow the effect of reduced governmental layers

95

Table 22 shown above illustrates the effect of two changes, - dropping the slope of the social pyramid to get rid of bureaucracy, which alone makes the worker far richer - even with the excessively low assumption of 4.0  units of production.    The best estimate of  such reward for productivity is an increase to 5.5 units, and that gives us a society which is "rich beyond the wealth of Croatius"  Thus a steep pyramidal Governmental bureaucracy is the absolutely worst thing that could happen, and even worse their own misbegotten (theft - pay without returning value for value received)  anti-incentives are acting against themselves! Everyone would be far better off, but they would be required to get their nose out of the hog trough and to get an honest job to earn those much higher paychecks.

The founding fathers, or at least a majority of them, knew the dangers of an unchecked national government, and placed in the "Bill of Rights" an amendemnt, the tenth, which was intended to check the growth of this level of government, and keep it from getting out of control.  I suspect that never in their worst nightmares could they imagine what has happened.

There at the time were two conflicting elements, the advolcates of a very strong national or federal government, who won a major political and propaganda victory by taking the name "Federalists".   Naturally the opposition was called the "Anti-federalists" and they cried "foul" to no avail,  the names stuck.  In actuality the Anti-federalists we in favor of a weak national or federal government, and a lose federation of States with the political power vested in the States.  The Federalists favored a strong federal government, and weak states rights. The CIvil War was actually fought dominantly over these two factors, and not slavery,  as is usually reported in History books.  Slavery was the excuse, not the real reason for the conflict.  The Southern States wanted sovreign power, and attempted to withdraw their deligation of power from the - in their opinion - excessively strong and interfereing national government. Ethically theu had that right.  But the North was more powerful and was able to inflict their will and to enslave the SOuthern states to a government which they did not want! So THEY actually were practicing slavery, over a greater number of people.

T.       CONTINENTAL GOVERNMENT (Seven 1evels of Government)

This complex governmental system actually now exists in embryo in China and can be projected for much of the world in the next century. The European Common Market also fits in embryo into this level. The seventh level,  unless it can displace manpower in the middle levels is an unmitigated disaster for producers. The observed population ratios in the past were 1:3:5:7:9 and thus the next number in that progression is 11 leaving 11 producers trying to support 25 others. While that looks bad enough, the additional productivity caused by specialization and trade should make this possible,  if the consumption distribution does not increase by a factor of 2 geometrically between levels as it usually does.

This second problem is the distribution of the created value. The observed pattern is that each level approximately demands double the pay of the one below it   Thus the projections ($) would be:

     Level        1,2         3         4        5        6         7

     $ pay         $1         $2     $4      $8      $16     $32

    number       11          9       7        5        3        1

    fraction       6%      10%    16%   22%   27%    18%

In the above example the middle layers have 'eaten up  the value created by the lower levels,  and while there are a very few very rich at the top of  the pyramid the  lower  levels are on average  in poverty.  The productivity must rise to 9.8 units, which is highly improbable if not impossible, just to keep the base at 2 units matching consumption in prior less complex governmental systems

    Level                                       base                    3                      4                    5                    6                      7

    Population   N                            11                    9                      7                    5                     3                     1

    Distribution                           30.6%                25%                19.4%          13.8%           8.3%                 2.7%

.                                                                                                                                                                               .

N Distribution                             6.2%                10.1%             15.8%           22.5%         27.1%               18.1%

    value %,  units                         1.11                  2.23                 4.47                 8.9              17.9                  35.8

    Population                     I         243                      81                    27                   9                 3                      1

    Distributionl                             67%                   22%                7%                2.4%          0.8%             0.3%

    Idealistic                       M        (90)                   (45)                 (21)                (9)             (3)                 (1)

    (Moderate)                  M       (53%)               (27%)               (12%)           (5%)          (1.7%)            (0.6%)

Real         Value                N      1.11                    2.23                 4.47                 8.9            17.9                35.8

5.5           units                 I      3.01                    6.02                  12.0                24.1           48.2                96.3

                                          M   (1.63)                 (3.25)               (6.5)                 (13)           (26)               (52)

    Modify from                 N     1.52                    2.75                  4.96                  8.92           16.0                29.8

    x2 to x 1.8                       I      3.46                    6.22                  11.2                 20.1            36.3               65.3

per level                            M    (2.71)                 (4.89)               (8.81)           (15.8)           (28.5)            (51.4)

Table 23 Distribution of Wealth and Population for CONTINENTAL "T" Pyramid of Seven Levels;  Observed population  (normal  font),  The Idealized (underlined) and (More REALISTIC) (in parenthesis) populations are shown to show the effect of reduced population in governmental layers, and last row shows the effect of less consumption variance (less difference allowed between layers) on the consumption distribution.

As has been previously noted, when the mal-distribution exceeds about 20:1 from top to bottom this is sufficient reason to cause potential stability problems and possibly cause a revolution. The value mal-distribution in the French Revolution exceeded 1000:1, and the result of that is well known. If the people are well off, then even 100:1 is easily tolerated. When they reach subsistence levels, the polarization in wealth causes political polarization as well.

Note in table 23 that the two problems mentioned of too many middle level managers, and too much mal-distribution of value both must dealt with. By removing the middle population a very flat pyramid with the base of 243 and levels separated ny a factor of not less than 3 the lowest level consumption was at 3 units, a very satisfactory result.  But when that was relaxed to the 90 base pyramid, the lower level was back under 2 units which is about the lowest number that should be tolerated.

The modification of the distribution from a geometric factor of 2 only to 1.8 did very little without modification of the pyramid population. The wealth distribution did very little additional to the flat pyramid, but the combination of BOTH some distribution and some elimination of middle layers, had by far the most pronounced effect. Realistically bureaucrats can not be trusted or expected to reduce their pyramid without extreme coercion to much below the "moderate' proposal.  But by control of both factors the people in lower levels can be expected to fare very well. Further as they are rewarded for work, that should provide incentive for higher productivity and the 5.5 units which was held constant to obtain the  comparison  should be  expected  to be  increased more  or  less proportionally to the pay, and thus increase to about 7.5 (or even 8.5) thus increasing their own pay from 2.75, which is quite reasonable, to a real value of 3.78, which is actually moderately wealthy!

This is caused by a positive (note not negative) feedback effect where the government is out of control and chokes off the incentive to produce. It accentuates its own inefficiency by parasitism which consumes most of what wealth there is. This doubly reduced wealth input into the society reduces the incentive to produce. Like the mistletoe, the parasites destroy their host. But given removal of this positive, reverse, society flourishes beyond their wildest dreams.

REPEAT: Society must control two things, 1) the number of "public servants" (Civil Masters in a mature society) and 2) the fraction of wealth that they consume.

Placing workers paid by various governmental levels in their proper level causes a bit of a problem. This can best be illustrated by an example. The present level 6 National government of the United States taxes, and then spends as follows: The money first passes through level 5 Bureaucrats, below the top level (Congress and the top Executive levels) in Washington D.C.; taking a cut before passing it on. They spend some at lower int~nal levels (secretarial etc.) within their own bureaucracy. The remaining funds then go to a lower governmental agency at level 4, which in turn passes it to a governmental contractor at level 3, each taking a cut before passing it on.  This then passes to the real workers at level

2.         Thus the numbers in each of the lower levels is augmented by the funds from the level above.  Each level in general augments the numbers in all levels below them.  This also needs to be halted because of too many levels to allow accountability.

p 100

p 101

L

Table 25 is a compilation of the progression of political philosophy compared to the 700 year cycle. There are several clear political philosophies, which have changed with time which merit more comment than just presentation in that table.

DELEGATION DOWNWARD

In roughly 3000 BC the King-Gods or at least representatives of "gods" delegated all powers downward from King to Vizier to other officials and eventually to the peasantry who farmed the land that "god" had delegated to them. In return they gave the excess products of the land, more than they needed to consume immediately, and particularly storable products like grain back to the god who in turn returned to them when needed. This swap back and forth drove the Egyptian and Mesopotamian civilizations.

FEUDAL SYSTEM delegation down via Oligarchy

This system is based on pure raw power; his knights and lords, who rule over their peasants by force of arms, support the King.  They in theory owe protection to their subjects in return for their allegiance.  This can take the form of may levels: A 1) Emperor is over the 2) Kings who are over the 3) Earls (Counts) over the 4) Barons, over the 5) Lords, 6) Knights, and finally subject 7) non - "noble" peasants. The theory involves position by BIRTH and The Divine Right of Kings to rule.  But this gives way from Divine Right of Kings to assuming power comes from the strength of the people themselves, and the nobility are supported only by the vitality and production of commoners under them.

DEMOCRACY, Delegation of power upward

By about 500 BC the pretense of some men to be better than others was open to question and the Greeks invented democracy where all citizens were given equal voice. They did not give equality to all men, quite to the contrary, slaves were not citizens, and women were "inferior" men who were "defective" and thus relegated to baby production and household duties (translation slaves of another sort). Unbridled Democracy was an only mildly mitigated disaster. The majority repressed the minorities, and the obvious injustice created the need for a Republic.

REPUBLIC protection of minority "rights"

This form of government is best described in detail as expressed by Plato, and is that form of government where the rights of the minorities were protected, and most specifically protected from the majority.  The majority rules, but only so long as they do not infringe the rights of others. The main problem is how to protect those rights. "Quis custodet ipsos custodet?"- Who will guard the policemen?

SEPARATION OF LEGISLATIVE,  JUDICIAL and LEGISLATIVE POWERS

In Rome the powers of making laws and enforcement of laws was separated to establish a "check and balance" between the different portions of government. Later in the British system the Judicial powers where also separated giving a three way check and balance.  The concept was to provide adversary powers, to oppose force with force so that any one of the three branches which tried to exceed its powers the other two would step in to restore a balance. 

102

A PROGRESSION OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY C Dcc 1992   J. H. L. Lawler

A 5200 BC I level Tribe, Clan chief, extended family system.

B  4700 1 level City (more than one family) leader tyrant of local agrarian area   autocracy propped up by armed supporters and might make: right.

C 4000 Many city states each one level of oligarchical government, not nation yet, kings absolute autocrats, Human sacrifice common.

D 3300 Mainly union of several smaller cities with major capital city into state nations 2 indistinct level: of government. King is God on earth. Human sacrifice continued, particularly at hi: death.  Cities are just a center of a (arming area, 90% agrarian economy.

E 2600 Several city state: w CLEAR Delegation down tinder STRONG central national government. 2 DISTINCT levels occasionally 3. (local) city and national. King Is God & owns both land and people who work for his pleasure. Human sacrifice ending. or rare.  Economy slanted to please Pharsoh  / Lugal etc. Agrarian economy - cities are just administrative centers (or farming.

F 1900 Early King of Kings mentality - 2 or more city state areas united into natlon₁ Indistinct 3 level system. Main king claims to he god but no one believes it any more - but they find it advantageous to pretend so to keep society working smoothly Secondary control of much land delegated to oligarchy example Nomarchs.  Farm economy₁ city craftsmen.

0 1400BC Emperor- King of Kings, Empire of nations three or Indistinct four levels-l) Main "Emperor", 2) regional viceroy / governor- and 3) local city state Nomarch or County ruler with 4) town chiefs local authority in places  -Free citizen individuals, King Pharaoh / Emperor who owns most land delegates land use to level 2 or 3, but individuals have private personal property. King appointed by deiry₁ and becomes one with gods on his death, King appoints oligarchy - king, makes all laws is chief judge and executive officer. Nomarchs delegated as judges and executive:.

H 5008C Distinct 4 level government in feudal society (see above). Theory of Voting. to decide issues (!) democracy and Republic) - rather than flight. (Limited selection of citizens to vote). Elected leaders, by popularity.   Private personal property even for slaves- land owned by "gentry" - - "judges" separated from combined legislative executive' branch - farm city economic transition. craftsmen "cottage industry" diffused In society rustic quality.

I 200AD End of Level 4, start of S Becoming 100 large for one Imperial governmental seat, Slave economy~ mixed citizenry of free people and slaves Kings or Emperors form two or more elite oligarchies separation of Legislative (Senate) and Executive branch; "State religion" controlled by those in power. -Government by elite oligarchy. judicial system more or less independent of executive (at least in theory) but Imperial executives make many judicial ~decisions, national basis for trade economy

I 900AD Trial by combat - Feudal society at least five distinct but changing layers of (l) Emperor. (2) Kings. (3) Earl (Count), (4) Baron. (5) Lord-Divine Right of Kings etc. to rule; birth major consideration, by the grace of God, and he does God's will.  Magna Charta - bill of rights.  - People power and government in theory for good of and represents the people - legislative separated from executive and judicial well separated. trial by Jury. Church and Slate begin separation.

K I7OOAD.6 level Empire (6) of nations (S) made up of states (4) made up of counties (3) with major independent cities (²) in counties and (I) Local authorities in cities. The individual PEOPLE HAVE RIOIITS - Law in theory by delegation of "rights" downward to REPRESENTATIVES  ', Separation of church and state”. Separate judicial, legislative and executive Systems - "we the people" supreme in theory, equality, and democracy important.

L 2400AD Continental powers.  Weighted voting by taxation

VOTING

The theory of democracy has been extended to include voting. If men have approximately equal force of arms, and with guns,  (the great equalizers)  they do have approximately equal potential violence available. By voting society can avoid armed conflict to settle issues. The majority wins without annihilation of the minority. Thus words, and votes settle the political issue. This form of democracy has the virtue of avoiding violence, but "Can you name ANY instance where the majority was right?" Votes at one point in time were restricted to male land owners (freeholders) over 21 years of age. Then all men over 21 who were not slaves. The slaves were given freedom, and allowed to vote.  At least nominally, but then various tricks were used to disenfranchise the blacks. The suffragette movement provided votes for women.

But note that the former slaves and women were given (note that word GIVEN not Earned) a "privilege" despite the fact that they are not equal in force which was the original basis. There is a further question about equal votes.

Should the IQ 80 janitor have the same vote as the IQ 150 University President? Should ten janitors be able to outvote one Albert Einstein? To take the reverse should one president be able to have more influence than 1000 average people?  Who is really correct?  The vote has no certifiable relationship to correct or ethical behavior.  The whole basis of "democracy" with one-man one vote is arbitrary and probably invalid.

It is suggested that people be given primary legislative and executive power proportional to their maturity.  We CAN test for that. It in general increases with age, but I do not mean pure age since many "children" never grow up. You see them on the freeway behind the wheel of car all the time. I would suggest a maturity scale like IQ such that the more intelligent, more mature men would count for more "votes" than the less mature. The typical range would be no more than 2:1 but it would giver a bias toward maturity.

It is also suggested that once taxation has been decided, everyone deciding by maturity, or by ability who will pay the taxes and perhaps even how much, that only those paying should decide how to spend what is paid, and in direct proportion to what they paid, one dollar (pound etc.) paid is one vote.

REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT

We no longer absolutely need this. It served two major purposes. First it took a democracy more toward a republic. The legislators tended to need to compromise to make laws. And being one level removed from pure mob control they tended to be less emotional and to consider minorities better. The flaw is that congressmen become arrogant and do not vote to represent their constituents, but vote either their own interest or that of a minority or special interest; (particularly ones who pay off in bribes –(legal now - but called campaign contributions). Why would a person spend $500,000 for a job that pays $130,000 for two years? Lets not be foolish- they want power, and those who pay expect payment for their investment).

Second People simply could not attend to legislation, themselves. The New England Town Meeting to pass laws is a better solution. But no every person can attend every legislature so they elected a "representative" to take delegated power to the legislative government. Particularly in Colonial times with Washington being several week's journey from some areas, this was necessary.

104

I suggest now it is possible to do away with representative form of legislation. We can go to direct (electronic) electorate. To overcome the problems of democracy I propose that an affronted minority should be able to revoke any bad law by only twenty percent rejection. Thus only laws that would be tolerated by a minority could be passed and the rights of the minority would be protected.

SUMMARY: Suggested direct weighted voting, by maturity & taxation.

SUMMARY OF PROGRESSIONS

Putting most of the progressions together, and comparing them to a specific sequence of the most advanced civilizations at the time, these progressions can be combined with the 700-1400 year cycle as shown in Table 26. Taking the time scale off the axis, this then gives a progression of conditions which are typically present at the same time. This is shown in Table 27, and 28.  This pair of tables is meant to provide a new abstraction separated from the 700 year cycle. The letters A, B, C, D, etc.  now represent stages of civilization.  They do correspond to the specific 700 year cycle they came from, but other cultures do not follow the same time scale, but do follow the sequence. For example the Inca (Inka) of Peru were in stage mixed C, D, B at 1500 AD when the Spanish who arrived in their territory were in Stage J.  The Inca had fine ceramics (C and higher, because they had them one thousand years prior make that D -B), and dressed stone (B), without arches (not yet F), but lacked writing (B or at least pre or near C because of string memory knots), and pre B in King rejecting human sacrifice.

The Maya were writing glyphs D, and still doing human sacrifice (pre B thus D), etc. so matching the sequence, but at a different time.  Thus the letters give a good index of cultural development independent of time scale. Thus the cultures can be classified by comparison of several progressions, to obtain a "status"

Even more important, by extending these progressions we may project what the future cultures SHOULD be.  That gives us a guide of where we are and where we should go, and also a warning note about "retarded" cultures, and perhaps a need to upgrade them, and prevent them form obtaining technological power (A bombs, Chemical Weapons, etc.) beyond their ability to control.

Let me say this another way -the point can not be underemphasized -each level of technology demands a certain ethical development. The ethics of most people in our present technology are NOT adequate to control the power which is potentially available. We are slipping technologically because of our poor ethics. We MUST upgrade our social ethical status in order to maintain our civilization. The technology IS indeed, as has been stated time and time again, out of balance from out science. That is why our science is slipping, not progressing as it should. This work provides a quantitative basis and a guide to better ethics.  It is necessary to teach these better ethics to prevent catastrophe. We cannot make productive and technological progress without cognate progress in ethics. Our society is only as strong as its weakest progression, and ethics right now are our "anchor" preventing movement in other areas.

105