This is not so much a comment as it is a wish, or a hope.
From my point of view, any system that's designed to place one individual in a position of power, whereby they suffer the risk of being corrupted by that power, is a system that is doomed to face what we do now. I wish that someday our system of Government, and Commerce for that ma…
This is not so much a comment as it is a wish, or a hope.
From my point of view, any system that's designed to place one individual in a position of power, whereby they suffer the risk of being corrupted by that power, is a system that is doomed to face what we do now. I wish that someday our system of Government, and Commerce for that matter, will have 3 "Parties" (or Bodies, Groups, Leagues, Sets, Coteries, Alliances, Teams, Coalitions) which place 3 individuals at the top, and at each level of the hierarchy. For example, 3 Presidents, 3 smaller "Supreme Courts" made up of three individuals each, 3 Houses of Congress etc.
Shared power in sets of 3 would require, even demand concurrence. Concurrence should instill trust, and trust could heal the nation.
I think you will really appreciate Elie mystal's proposal on the Supreme Court. He makes an excellent point that the federal courts long have had mechanisms in place similar to your idea here.
Which gets to the issue of the "other side" and not as a bothsidesism. The point is that an opposition party is supposed to DO something, and they pretend they can't. Yes they can.
The point is in regulating both businesses and government, it's long been an objective to prevent a "gaming" of the system - and what we have at Supreme Court is a gaming of the system, a captured court -- when no such thing could happen to the lower federal courts because they already have several mechanisms to prevent people from judge- and opinion-shopping.
This is not so much a comment as it is a wish, or a hope.
From my point of view, any system that's designed to place one individual in a position of power, whereby they suffer the risk of being corrupted by that power, is a system that is doomed to face what we do now. I wish that someday our system of Government, and Commerce for that matter, will have 3 "Parties" (or Bodies, Groups, Leagues, Sets, Coteries, Alliances, Teams, Coalitions) which place 3 individuals at the top, and at each level of the hierarchy. For example, 3 Presidents, 3 smaller "Supreme Courts" made up of three individuals each, 3 Houses of Congress etc.
Shared power in sets of 3 would require, even demand concurrence. Concurrence should instill trust, and trust could heal the nation.
I think you will really appreciate Elie mystal's proposal on the Supreme Court. He makes an excellent point that the federal courts long have had mechanisms in place similar to your idea here.
Which gets to the issue of the "other side" and not as a bothsidesism. The point is that an opposition party is supposed to DO something, and they pretend they can't. Yes they can.
The point is in regulating both businesses and government, it's long been an objective to prevent a "gaming" of the system - and what we have at Supreme Court is a gaming of the system, a captured court -- when no such thing could happen to the lower federal courts because they already have several mechanisms to prevent people from judge- and opinion-shopping.
Thanks Marc. That sounds very interesting. I'll check it out.