On Government and Justice
It is my view that the quintessential purpose of a federal government is to: Establish the process of peaceful transition of power, provide for the common defense, provide a subsistence existence to the people living within it’s borders, and to control the power of corporations. Government may also become involved in education, promoting equality, liberty, freedom, and the triumph of the human spirit; structure of a limited but non-exclusive immigration policy, and insure the perpetuity of it’s resources.
The question of justice must be considered carefully. Justice should take into account the circumstances of the perpetrator at all times. It can never convict an innocent man. I cannot be an instrument of social control. It is in the interest of government to remove what I describe as “broken people” from the streets. Broken people are, specifically, those who are genetically or conditionally predisposed to hurting others without remorse, or those with an overarching sense of self importance. All others, in my experience, has a reason to do what they do. They can continue as valid members of society. Deference should be given to them.
I am not describing the American judicial system. Trial by jury would be out. My system specifically discriminates. “The letter of the law”, in my view, is a moral abyss. However, the American system puts innocent people in jail. It ruins peoples lives who have, admittedly, done something harmful, but who could continue as productive people, and it is clear that broken people have not been purged from the system as is evidenced by the fact that we have problems with “repeat offenders”, which is not to say that all repeat offenders are broken, just that many are.
In my opinion, the American judicial system is fundamentally flawed. The exception is the Supreme Court which, at many points, has done the right thing consistently. My primary gripe starts at the State Court level on down. Those courts can be prejudicial, inefficient, and easily manipulated. Trial by jury is inherently flawed by the fact that people are flawed. As has been proven by the recent release of a number of murder convictees due to DNA evidence, it cannot assure that the innocent are not convicted of high crimes.
The US system of police enforcement is despicable for a twenty-first century democracy. My primary complaint is that it is an institution that controls by use of fear. I am not the only one who cringes and makes sure they are driving absolutely correctly when faced with the cop in your rear-view. For many, the experience with law enforcement causes them to do a “bad” thing later. If the populous had a bond with it’s protectors, society would move more smoothly.
All current laws must fall in order to begin anew. A new place must be found, a new way of thinking must take root, I suppose a revolution. It would not be possible to adapt America.
In their place, for lack of a better instrument, a test would be given to the entire populous. It would be designed to test for multiple types of intelligence. Someone who was good at math would be encouraged to go into a math-related field. Artistic skills could be appreciated. Test anxiety would be figured in. It would be the most researched test in human history, trying to find the best in all; or it would not be worth doing. People would be urged, hopefully to their benefit, to do the thing they are best at. No person would be forced to do anything.
A set of criteria for Judges and Police would be found, and those people would be asked to start training for those positions. Judges would be those most emphatic, moral, and wise; and also logical, prudent, and discerning. They would be encouraged to get the most well-rounded education possible. The first round of Judges would have to be elected, perhaps by the local legal bar. Those Judges would be tasked with creating another test that would allow entry into Judge-dom, a test designed to measure empathy and compassion, not the law. The sitting judges would have to step down and couldn’t judge again until the next cycle. The test would be given to the next round of Judge-trained people, meaning anyone being designated Judge material in the first test. Those passing would become Judges. After a set time, the sitting Judges would write a new test, step down, and wouldn’t be allowed to test for a term.
With the best possible Judges in place, the system of Justice becomes much more streamlined. Both Prosecution and Defense have all resources needed to make their case, within reason, provided by the State. Both are given a reasonable time to show the facts, testimony given, all pertinent evidence presented. A panel of three Judges would then deliberate for a reasonable time and decide the case. If the Defense feels the justification for their client’s conviction is illogical, or can by argued against based on interpretation of the facts; or if the Judge in the panel deems it necessary, a new trial will be held using new Judges. This process could continue infinitely.
Once guilt has been established, a second panel of Judges would be convened. This panel would decide the penalty for the crime and whether any extenuating circumstances should be considered. If it is deemed that the offender can be rehabilitated, this panel of Judges would see that it is done. If an offender is deemed to be “broken”, it is in the purview of the Judges to incarcerate the person for life, or to follow procedures used for other “broken” people.
Police would be tested for honesty, compassion, and nobility, in addition to physical skill, marksmanship, and force of will. A person testing high for Policeman-ship, would be encouraged to pursue their second-highest strength. After five years, all those who passed the test for Police would be contacted by the State and asked to be a Policeman. All those who apply would be accepted. Police training would not change much. More “customer service” classes would be required. Police would be tasked with promoting the general welfare about all else. If someone gets trampled in a crowd, a Policeman should be first at the scene. Some places cannot be breached by protesters for a civil society to work. Police would be there to protect those places, though not break up a lawful protest. If someone got drunk and threatened their sig-other, the Police would be there to make sure the spouse crashed out. The Police would be as non-intrusive as possible, always trying to defuse any situation and never seeking to arrest for arresting’s sake.
If not as many Police chose to serve as are needed, the Police who do serve will be asked to disperse equally around the region and will be given right to hire locals from the region to serve. If too many Police and/or Judges serve, they will all be accepted. The tests will be rethought to see if they are valid, but, if deemed so, as many Police and Judges as are eligible would be accepted.
During the initial test, Psychologists would screen for “broken” people, as defined above. Upon finding one, a panel, begot like Judges above, would be convened to determine if, in fact, the person in question is “broken.” They’d probably call it something else. Once deemed broken, an individual will be given a limited choice. Perhaps the military could use them. Other jobs could work for them. At any rate, they would be segregated from the general populous.
So far, I have a permanent underclass and at least two privileged classes. Modern liberal democracy, it is not. It is an utopian vision based on my best interpretation of human nature. I doubt this document will ever come to anything, but this is how I see the best way to all just get along.
My utopia country would be a true democracy. Every person would have a vote on everything that concerns them. A fail-proof and dynamic internet system would have to be set up to allow for the owning of votes. Vote ownership and privacy would be a prime responsibility of the Government. If a password it cracked, the user would have to have quick recourse to reclaim their vote. Confidence in vote ownership is essential.
A vote may be sold or bartered for any good or service. You can sell your vote. If you want to sell it to a political group that you like, go ahead. If you don’t care, sell it to the highest bidder. Vote on everything if you want, which pot holes to fix in the next door city. You can sell your vote in one election and not others. Elections are held to elect the only representatives in my system, the rule writers. Based on a Federal map, local, “state”, and Federal rule writers will be elected. They will convene at least four times a year to write rules. Any rules they write will be put to a full democracy vote of their constituency. Rules that pass become law dispensed by the Police and Judges.
Police and Judges get a second vote to be used if deemed necessary. Police, unsolicited, can vote because a law is “unenforceable.” If twenty-five percent of all Police, unsolicited, vote “unenforceable” on a specific rule, a second, called, vote will be held of the Police. If that vote ends in a majority voting “unenforceable”, the rule will be thrown out. Unenforceable means that it would exceed the allocated resources by 100% for 90% or so effectiveness.
Judges can vote a rule, “immoral”, with the same mechanism. Immoral means that a majority Judges feels that a law is immoral.
The exact makeup of the rule writers I will leave up to the person who establishes my utopia. I like the American House and Senate for it’s fairness in representation (a population house and a regional house.) It is very important not to allow the population to petition the government for redress of grievances. That part of the Bill of Rights has not done America well. Rule writers must be given every freedom to travel and congregate with the people, but it should be let known to them that taking an appointment from a vested interest is unbecoming to their station. A lobbying industry is illegal, I hereby decree future establisher of my utopia. An organization deemed a “lobbying” organization can be prosecuted as per the civil method below. Though it is true that some members of the rule writers may have literally bought their position, it should be emphasized that they are there to write the rules for the people they represent.
Civil proceedings should be rare and difficult to bring. Any person living in the country may write an e-mail to an executive branch letting them know that in injustice has been perpetuated. This e-mail can be anonymous, but it should be stressed that a non-anonymous submission has a better chance of getting resolved. Under no circumstance should this e-mails contents be disclosed to anyone outside the executive branch.
Once the complaint is on the record and the submitter somehow verified, a civil proceeding can begin. If the plaintiff can be contacted, they will be given a choice of legal council to present their side of the story. If the plaintiff cannot be contacted for whatever reason, an investigation based on the e-mail submitted will begin. A panel of three Judges will convene to discuss the level of injustice the e-mail claims, the possible cost, and the validity of the document. Some of these functions may be performed by a set of special Judge employees, paid for by the executive, The Judges then are authorized to use an executive department created for this purpose to investigate the injustice. If a case can be made that an injustice has occurred, an attorney will be appointed by the panel to represent that side of the case.
The Defendant is given two weeks after they are informed of the charges to prepare. The trial progresses like the criminal trial above. Deference in punishment should be given to promotion of moral behavior and education related to the injustice. Cash rewards should be rare. Punishment is entirely up to the punishment panel, and cannot be constrained by rules.
The executive