Managing human societies is a complex and difficult task. No general method has emerged yet that could be a universal way of governing huma...
Managing human societies is a complex and difficult task. No general method has emerged yet that could be a universal way of governing human society. The task is inevitable but seems unresolvable.
Throughout history, there have been many attempts at social governance systems. None of this has worked as a universal, well-functioning solution. Among the thoughts is a proposal for a social guidance system as well. The task is complex and intricate because human society is also complex and intricate and constantly changing.
Even if it is difficult to find the best solution, societies are constantly developing, adjusting, and optimizing the social governance model they are actually using. Development and optimization do not always take place in a positive, forward-looking direction, the subjective intention of an individual or group sometimes becomes dominant. The process can only be effective if we look for generally valid correlations and objective characteristics in the operation and structure of society, and we build the guidance system of society according to these.
Such a universally valid feature of structure construction is, for example, the interacting but self-functioning units of society and their cooperation.
Units of the society that can function on their own are a person, family, company, city, country, and so on. These self-functioning units also interact at their own level with each other. It is appropriate and recommended to establish conciliation mechanisms in the jurisdiction where these self-functioning units interact, to coordinate cooperation for effective social functioning.
Societies actually use such conciliation mechanisms and form conciliation bodies in many cooperating levels. This is nothing new. However, for the efficient functioning of society, this principle must be followed wittingly and consistently. At all levels of society, at the actual level of independently existing, therefore self-functioning, but interacting, cooperating units, it is necessary to establish conciliation systems and forums for efficient and stable operation.
For example, how can the societal system of the United States be made more effective by applying this principle?
The United States is a country of more or less independent states based on their alliance. The states that built the alliance retained their independence in several areas even after the formation of the United State. The unity of the society, the unified governance of the country, the integration of the people is the task of the two parties organized uniformly in the country. The diverse views of the citizens, and thus the country’s integration, are represented by, and the task of two artificially formed, rivaling political approaches. The unification of the country is represented by the party or parties currently in power.
Apparently, the conscious or unconscious intention to build a unified country created this party structure. This social organization based on non-generic, non-self-evident societal processes is a source of many tensions in the social life of the United States.
The established system also works even with its faults in the structure fixed by laws and customs. However, this social system can also be further enhanced within the existing legal framework, taking into account the principle set out above. Conciliation systems at the state level - as they are self-functioning units of the society - are needed for efficient and stable operation.
There seem to be several of these conciliation systems in the United States. Such bodies are the two institutions of Congress with similar functions and interestingly different conceptions, the Senate and the House and the federal government represented by the President as well. The problem with this organization is that it does not represent integration in a natural, generic way. The unnatural realization of the intention of integration, the operation of national parties dominates these bodies. Natural, generic hierarchization would result in the formation of a different system.
It is clear that the more effective social functioning of the United States of America would require either the abandonment of state autonomy or a change in federal governance. Both are inconceivable in the foreseeable future for historical reasons. However, the principle of establishing systems and forums at all levels of society which are functioning on their own, therefore operating independently, but influencing each other at their own level of cooperating units, can also be applied within the existing legal framework. In accordance with the application of the principle, and at the same time according to the generic evolution of the social organization, it would be necessary to establish a council of governors formed by the leaders of each state.
In principle, both the Senate and the House are such a forum, but as stated above, they are not generic forms, they practically function according to the operation of national parties, and are not organized according to the principle set out above. The Council of Governors would represent the generic principle.
The formation of the Council of Governors is not necessary to violate constitutional principles, nor is it necessary to create new laws for its operation. The Council of Governors can function informally, as a conciliation body, creating non-binding agreements, and in such a way behaving more independently from parties. However, the Council of Governors would generically represent the universally valid principle of social governance, the necessary existence of a conciliation system and forum that function between the states, the independent and therefore self-existing, but also interacting units of the society.
The Council of Governors could, in general, make the social functioning of the United States of America more efficient, for example by providing effective protection, preventing destruction, or reducing the impact of an incompetent and unsuitable presidency in contrast to the more party-based and committed Congress.
No comments