3 ms·

The core issue is that the Masonic trilateral structure - legislative, judiciary, & executive - is showing its age. The problem is fundamentally structural. We

The core issue is that the Masonic trilateral structure - legislative, judiciary, & executive - is showing its age. The problem is fundamentally structural. We have generally unqualified representatives drafting ambiguous regulatory laws that then need to be interpreted by some entity, whether the courts (whose expertise is law) or the agencies (whose expertise is not law). There are two related difficult problems in governance models: entrenched bureaucracies and security services. Specialized tasks that require professionals who can naturally form a political block and subsequently political will and clout. However their responsible roles are by definition 'professional'. I think we need to start thinking of a more modern political structure, specially in light of communication and information technology available. This debate over who is overreaching and who gets to get bribed or what ideological faction will get to interpret is a futile endeavor. The core issue is 'legal and political consensus that is informed by expert insights'. As an example (to get you thinking) more 'real-time' engagements between different branches of the system could address all of the issues that SC or its decision opponents are arguing about.

kllrnohj 2y ago
I'd argue a much more core issue is simply the primitive voting system guarantees a two-party system. The US desperately needs ranked choice voting which would inject diversity into the system, diversity that's necessary for survival. Any political structure is going to fail when you have a duopoly. One side decides to not play "fair" and bam, everything falls apart. You need to avoid any individual party having full control in the first place. Then the checks and balances can actually function.
- temporarely 2y ago
  That would be a component of a more modern system but I remain convinced that static functional groupings are systemically erroneous. Arguably the entire political parties approach is boneheaded as well. Entrenched structures and groups. How do we prevent this from happening while insuring sane collective governance with reasonable continuity. That is the question.

kllrnohj 2y ago

I'd argue a much more core issue is simply the primitive voting system guarantees a two-party system. The US desperately needs ranked choice voting which would inject diversity into the system, diversity that's necessary for survival. Any political structure is going to fail when you have a duopoly. One side decides to not play "fair" and bam, everything falls apart. You need to avoid any individual party having full control in the first place. Then the checks and balances can actually function.

temporarely 2y ago
That would be a component of a more modern system but I remain convinced that static functional groupings are systemically erroneous. Arguably the entire political parties approach is boneheaded as well. Entrenched structures and groups. How do we prevent this from happening while insuring sane collective governance with reasonable continuity. That is the question.