Building a Bridge to the Future

IdT, like all living systems, is evolving. We assert that we all have the following unalienable rights.

• Life
• Liberty
• The Pursuit of Happiness
• Privacy
• Health
• A Humane Environment Humane Nutrition
• Humane Habitation
• Education
• An Equal Share of the Commonwealth
• Participation in Free Enterprise
• The Right of Residency and Movement
• The Constitutional Guarantees of Citizenship

Principles

The "common good" is the product of humane ecosystems; the "common right" is the unalienable rights and the "common just" is ecological equity. domestic Tranquility is a free peoples exercise of their unalienable rights in a humane exosystem. We have two definitions of government: one from the Preamble to the Constitution which includes Justice, domestic Tranquility, common defense, and General Welfare, and the other from the Declaration of Independence contained in the quotation on page one of this issue of We the People.

Changes for 1990

It's time to start enlarging these concepts and putting them together into a coherent story. To that end, in 1990, each issue of We the People will highlight one of the unalienable rights and each story will be identified by an appropriate topic heading to identify the right or principle under discussion. The topic headings appear in this issue. We will begin at the beginning with the unalienable right "life" in the January issue of We the People. Other stories and essays will be included as well, as has been the case in the past, except now each will be topically identified as to its relationship to the principles and concepts of IdT.

IdT will appear in 10 issues in 1990 instead of the 12 that have been issued for 1989. For July/August and November/December, one issue will cover both months and may be enlarged to accommodate more material if needed.

A Taxonomy of Concepts

The purpose of organizing We the People in this manner is to bring order to the systems values of IdT and to begin to develop a taxonomy of the concepts. Perhaps in a year or two, after members and correspondents differentiate themselves by their interests in the cafeteria of rights IdT is offering, it will be possible to have a meeting of members, correspondents, and interested citizens, organized along the lines of the unalienable rights and ecological equity. It would be a first and would address what Edmond Cahn called in his book, The Predicament of Democratic Man, The Macmillan Company, New York, 1961, Passive Rights. "...for or what practical value," he said, "are political and legal equality to a man who has not bread to eat, no chlothes to wear, no roof to shelter him, no chances to earn a livlihood?" These questions are especially relevant in our day when we have seen drastic changes in the way social services are delivered in the nation — because of changes in budgetary policy, not law. We have chosen to make ourselves "defense poor" to reduce the dependence of dependent citizens on our government. We have restructured defense policy as the "rock" and tax reductions as the "hard place." To what end is yet to be determined. In no way have recent Federal Administrations acted as though those in need had unalienable rights. Or that ecological equity— opportunity to improve oneself through the exercise of the unalienable rights — even existed.

Budget Equity

A major reason for our disenfranchisement — homelessness, health care deficiencies, education in disarray, capital punishment for the youth and retarded, attacks on privacy, a cancer producing industrial environment, millions of people without proper nutrition — is that we do not have the system into which to place these issues and the vocabulary with which to discuss them.

The only way these grievances could be redressed would be if the Federal Government is induced to work the way the Founders meant it to work—with Justice, domestic Tranquility, common defense and General Welfare receiving equitable and loving attention when the business of the Federal Government is transacted.

Citizen/Sovereigns

The people, collectively must exert their rights as citizen/sovereigns. The Federal Government must be disciplined to serve the citizen/sovereign. The Federal Government is a tool, a mechanism, a process to carry out the will of the people — it is not a thing in and of itself. It has no meaning outside its purpose to provide the unalienable rights to its citizens and to govern with their just consent. Jefferson thought the Federal Government should be reexamined within each generation (19 years for him) and no succeeding generation should be bound by the preceding one. That is perhaps a bit drastic. But we have seen a change in 40 years in Eastern Europe and there is every reason to think our own government can evolve into a truly representative government—representing the interests of all the citizens, even the disadvantaged ones. A trillion dollar defense effort with trillion dollar debts and the homeless begging on the streets: is this the America that shines on the hill? The U.S. is an industrial giant asleep while our competitors are using the interest from our own debt to buy our future technology.

There is a monkey wrench in the works. Presidents do not seem to be elected to govern they seem to be elected act on the public stage. The President's popularity (image) is much more important than his ability to govern. In Reagan's first term, when asked about his performance in specific programs the electorate gave him about a 40% approval rating, but when asked if they liked him he received a 70% approval. Maybe that's ok if your talking about your wife or husband—but the leader of the free world?

The Obligation to Vote

The Census Bureau should be directed to issue a Social Security Number and a Voter Registration Number (same number) to every living citizen in the United States and henceforth to issue them at birth. Failure to vote in Federal elections upon reaching proper voting then could be punishable by a fine not to exceed $25.00 and the fines used to finance Federal elections. No candidate should spend anything except but the public funds to get elected and no elected candidate should represent any entity except the citizens she/he was elected to represent. Voting in primary elections should be optional, but should be mandatory in the general elections. Voting is not a right—it is the obligation of the citizen-sovereign. How can any government say it has the "just consent" when only 40% vote?

IdT's job is to inform its members and correspondents and the public at large. We feel obliged to introduce the new vocabulary into the public dialogue. We feel obliged to research it, to teach it, to publish it, and disseminate it any way we can word of mouth or the written word.

Idt needs a Few Good People

It all starts with us. We are the quantum event is what we do. We can continue to act in random, but normal, fashion or we can introduce some coherence in our thinking and action. What Illya Prigogine called dissipative structures, structures that fall apart if they are not maintained, like our society, are the systems in which we live. They replicate themselves, they generate themselves, they are decision systems and we are in them. Question is: can we as ordinary citizens affect them?

Starting Conditions

In one of his examples illustrating "starting conditions" and coherence out of randomness, Prigogine described the building of a termite nest. They can get quite huge and require the organization to cope with up to 7 million individuals. He said that the termites move in random directions carrying and dropping grains of sand or pieces of soil. When seven or eight (a small number) by chance happen to drop their loads in close proximity to each other, all the other termites come to this place with their cargo and the construction of the nest is underway. Is that the story of our lives? Will some small number of us, by chance let our ideas fall in proximity to each other and start an edifice of thought that could affect the lives of millions, hopefully, for the better? Since the cost of the starting conditions is so small and the potential return so huge, we must make the gamble. How many will it take to start the bridge?

. . . Ted Sudia . . .

© Copyright 1989
Institute for domestic Tranquility