Thread by @mhbx

@RKBower1 1/ It is the question I have been working to get to all along.

Your concern was the driving concern of the constitutional principles: How to diffuse power so to minimize it corrosive, corruptive influence.

The functions of government will be done, whatever name you call them.

@RKBower1 2/ To take an old example in our discussions: The functions of enforcing contracts requires a substrate of law. This law has to adapt to current conditions. In just this sentence is the seeds for each of the 3 main governmental functions.
Justice, Legislative, Executive.

@RKBower1 3/ The only question is what form will these functions be manifested, made operational in time & space. For ex, could be all reside in a King, or a Dictator, a Church, a CEO of a dominant multinational corp, Or Big Brother. Or "Gilead", or a benign Roman Emperor, or a venal one.

@RKBower1 4/ Recognizing this, the next question is how to structure the system. A system being the complex relationship of things to function and create an outcome. A system that is well designed has a clear mission/vision to it. This is true in corporations, as well as households

@RKBower1 5/ or individuals. But in this case the scope is a nation. A society. (And @systemically speaking, if you get the scope wrong, then your system will fail, like the first versions of a rocket that explodes on the launch pad).

I think you have correctly identified the core thing

@RKBower1 6/ issue as Power. How that is managed, expressed, contained, and utillized - like electricity - determines the longevity & viability of the "system". In this case a country. In this case America.
America being the first attempt at founding a nation on enlightenment principles

@RKBower1 7/ And etc. A worthy study. One that has a visionary, hopeful angle - the great country story, and another that shows the very imperfect lurching from one thing to another trying to work these ideas out. And we are in another consequential 'lurch' yet again.

@RKBower1 8/ So this thread could continue all sorts of ways. I'll just conclude with the point I was trying to set up: That power has many forms & manifestations. One of the most tangible, and ellusive, & compelling - like Smeagol's Precious was compelling - is money. Or rather wealth.

@RKBower1 9/ One of the great #systemicErrors I think is woven into our thinking is that "Capitalism" is a) the only economic system in the world that works b) that there is only 1 form of capitalism. Thus to deviate from it, or criticize it in any way is to be a looney on the fringe.

@RKBower1 10/ Avoiding the weeds in this thread, just to identify at least these 2 levels of distinction: 1) the "local" level where "capitalism" is the set of rules of exchange & trade. 2) A level where money is no longer transactional but a measure of wealth. A function of Power.

@RKBower1 11/ It is the distinction between (at least) these 2 levels that are routinely conflated that creates much if not most of the confusion & emotional outrage in the public square. Today we rail about socialism & heartless capitalism. Each have a different view of power & society.

@RKBower1 12/ Back to yours then: The entire conversation & effort is to try and figure out how to keep the function of power properly balanced between the state (however it is manifested) and the individual -- at all the levels from State to the Person.
To simply say: No government

@RKBower1 13/ To assert that the answer is "No Government" like libertarians do, is not to solve anything. It is to profoundly confuse labels & titles for the thing. As if No Government meant there would be no power dynamics.

It is a semantic solution to a systemic issue.

&etc.

@RKBower1 @threadreaderapp unroll