If you need a dead letter to keep your society from falling into corruption, it means you don't have anyone who can make the correct top-level decisions.
If you have someone who can make the correct top-level decisions, you don't need to try to make an unliving immortal golem to rule your society for you.
If you don't have anyone who can make the correct top-level decisions, then even if a golem were possible you don't have anyone who can make one.
Being explicit: if you need a constitution you can't have one. If you can have a constitution you don't need one.
What you want is to correctly address current conditions. Short of a perfect grand unified theory of geography and sociology, this requires current observations. A good leader is one who can make amendments to a constitution at will; if the constitution disagrees with a good leader, so much the worse for the constitution. To have a good leader, you must render your constitution moot.
By trying to have a constitution, one inherently assumes the leader will be a fool or a criminal. The only suitable constitution for a fool or a criminal is [you can't lead]. The correct form an American-style constitution is very short: [you're not allowed to do anything, fuck off to jail]. Enumerated rights: 0. If you don't have anyone who can be trusted as a watchman, you don't have anyone who can be trusted to watch the watchmen either.
A written constitution is largely a theft scheme. Maximum group size is determined by the maximum genetic wealth of the leader, which varies a lot. A constitution's coherent purpose would be to bridge the troughs of group size. In other words, allowing subpar leaders to steal group members they can't afford to buy. For the most part, a constitution is a crime.
A constitution can only not be a crime when group size can vary easily. When the constitution doesn't legitimize retention or "unity" or anything similar. Hence, Exit.
And that's why Muslims are basically subhuman. Islam does indeed constitute an American-style constitution. These constitutions are crimes, rendering Islam into one big criminal slum. Insofar as they've had competent sultans, it is when the sultans reject Mohammed. (Presumably they do it cleverly, so the laymen don't notice.)
Hopefully I'm wrong that constitutions can only have two lines. While this is no sociology GUT, there are certain very abstract always-true generalities which are known. Unfortunately, there are three of them.
Exit. Responsibility. Honesty. Let anyone leave whenever they want, have a Pope, and never lie. Iron curtains are always wrong, democracy is always wrong, and lying is always deviant and defective.
1 comment:
>"grand unified theory" simplifies to "gut"
Post a Comment