The U.S. Constitution as a model of an autonomous system

[Jack Ring]

Several months ago I proposed a dialog regarding the U.S. Constitution from a systems viewpoint. 

Some of you responded positively but then I got diverted into another project. Perhaps it will be useful to proceed now.

If you do not have access to the Constitution you can download one at http://lp.hillsdale.edu/free-pocket-constitution

Also, I encourage participants to understand the DSRP approach to explaining System. See https://www.crlab.us/  Distinctions, Systems, Relationships and Perspectives are a straightforward but powerful way of expressing our ideas to one another.

Then use these four factors to consider the Constitution of the United States of America (Meta Map 8 to 80 or the 8000 words). 

1. With this perspetive consider the qualifications of candidates for each Legislative and Executive branches including their implications on the evolution of the Judicial branch.  

IMO, using a business enterprise metaphor, 

a) the Executive branch continually promotes the United aspect of States of America. The calls for a CEO of 1.7 million federal employees plus 1.5 million members of the Armed Services as well as relationships with the Legislative and Judicial branches and the often overlooked relationship as Facilitator of the dialog among the CEO's of 50 respective states. 

b) the Legislative branch acts as the Board of Directors of the CEO. It calls for persons who can patch the existing system and design new aspects that will be responsive to the evolving, mutually-conflicting needs of their respective constituents.  They decide the kind of lives we citizens who are not members of the Executive branch will be able to achieve.

c) the Judicial branch acts as the auditors. They are not the umpires. The umpires are the voters.

2. Then consider the big R, Relationships. 

a) For the branches shall you elect someone who promises to FIGHT as their main modus operandi or someone who promises to WORK WITH in a way that accomplishes, for instance, Conceptual Blending (Gilles Fauconnier and Mark Turner)?

b) For the Legislative branch shall you elect those who are capable of being a sociotechnical system that accomplishes system design?

c) What are the mutual tensions that keep the system coherent as it changes?

3. What is the benefit or threat of any other group, such as a union or political party?

4. What happened to system stability provisions when the law was changed (1820?) to elect Senators by popular vote (same as Representatives) instead of by the vote of the respective State legislators?

5. What else is important up front?

Jack

[Aleksandar Malečić]

I was banned the last time I participated in a similar online discussion.

Those who fight don't delegate themselves or even their sons to fight. As soon as a chain of causes and effects becomes just a little longer, people don't feel responsible and cease to be accountable. The fact that I'm writing here in English and that my mother tongue is Slavic instead of Illyrian (?), many things that I accept just as a fish accepts water, are outcomes of violence or at least coercion. As violence and coercion become more affordable, human success and human annihilation will happen for the same reason and under the same rules.

Aleksandar