Modeling Open Source Government: Part I

The government is very frustrating sometimes because it is hard to see change taking place from where we (well, most of us) sit. What makes it even more difficult is how helpless we feel to change it. The computer science field may have a solution. Open Source has been around since 1987 and maybe it's the answer we've been looking for.

You can think of source code like this: if a computer program were a building the computer source code would be the blueprints. It is how the software is constructed. It is also important to note if one has the blueprints it is easy to produce the building but if one has the building it is extremely difficult to produce the blueprints.

The conventional method for developing software and marketing it is closed. The development of this kind of software is kept in house and only employees of that company work on it. The output from this is the "building" in the above example. The source code is not available to outsiders and the company maintains ownership of it.

On the contrary, with the open model, the source code is freely distributed with the software. So instead of just the building you get the blueprints as well.

What if there was a way to apply this development model to our government? More to follow ...

A Chip Off the ol' Block

If you had to guess someone's political affiliation but could only know one fact about the person what would you want to know? Their race? Their age? What you should want to know is what were their parent's affiliations. That is the number one indicator of a person's political affiliation.

Trying to be objective I took the following list from another web site and substituted government for children and individual for teen and got the following:

1. The government is clearly in charge.
2. The individual, over time, learns and earns the ability to be more in charge of their self.
3. There is a clear map for continually building trust and responsibility.
4. The government has a way to monitor the progress of the individual.
5. There are clear consequences when the individual demonstrates that he cannot be in charge of their self.
6. There is a map for how to earn back trust and responsibility when it is lost.

We can summarize by saying the government (parent) instills a sense of self worth, individualism, and self sustainability in its people. Parents do this by letting their children learn the consequences of their actions and to take responsibility for those actions, whether the outcome is positive or negative.

What kind of parents would we be if we protected our children by isolating them, not letting them try new things for fear they may fail, or teaching them to be dependent on us hence crippling them for life? Government keeps it's children safe, not from themselves, but from others. Keeping them safe from themselves cripples them, makes them dependent, and strips away the joy of success by providing too much help along the way.

You have the ability to choose the type of government you want for your children; which will it be?

Influencing the Two Party System

Voting for the candidate of your choice is important even if you think there is little chance he or she could win. There are several reasons for this:

1. It sends a positive message. Anytime you spend money on something, you are endorsing that product; whether it be a person, place, object, or more importantly an idea. Your vote sends the same message.
   
2. At the same time, it sends an anti-message. It also works in reverse by not endorsing the things you don't spend your money on. Your "un"-vote sends the same message.
   
3. It's honest. You're not letting the majority influence your decision by settling for someone who you really don't want to be elected. Think for a minute what it would be like to never see any poll numbers before an election. Imagine that the candidates campaign but no one reports/computes any statistics about who is leading the race, etc. Think of how that one simple fact would influence your decision. My guess is without the "bandwagon" you would vote more honestly.
   
4. Your not "opting" out. Let's face it no one is perfect, so therefore no candidate is perfect. Someone will be elected whether you vote or not. It might as well be the person you would endorse with your vote. When I go the the grocery store to buy jelly, I don't leave without buying any jelly at all because I don't see any jelly made in Georgia. I pick the best jelly that I can based on my options. If I really want Georgia jelly, I need to be more aggressive and maybe start calling or writing letters to manufacturers to start making GA jelly.
   

DNA of "Big" Government

Image by ynse via Flickr

Darwin, modern scientists, and science fiction writers (George Wells, The War of the Worlds) have all discussed the topic of genetic diversity. Darwin talked about how a species needed a certain amount of diversity to survive various extinction events such as a virus, genetic disorders, and natural events like drought. Modern scientists have warned against the use of antibacterial soaps and other products because the antibacterial agent ends up in the water supply in very minute concentrations. At these low concentrations, the bacteria is able to develop resistance. We saw what happened to the aliens in The War of the Worlds. Plot spoiler ... they died from a virus. In the movie the narrator says "...we [humans] have earned the right to be here." Meaning we have developed resistance to these types of things by being one of Darwin's fittest.

So, what does this have to do with government? Let's look at the U.S. in 2 different ways. The first, imagine each state in the U.S. were a person. But these 50 people were "born" from the same mold. Each state have the same ideals, same laws, same tax, same education system, and the same welfare system. Second, take the same 50 people but this time they have the same ideals and a very small number of laws in common. Some of the 50 have other things in common but not all 50 have all things in common. A state (person) now gets sick. Some new law has overstepped its bounds. Some new radical idea has swept the state. A new form of education has been adopted.

In the first case, all 50 states share so much in common that all 50 states are infected. This could be a good thing and the country continues on. But it could be something detrimental and maybe not overtly so. It might be something like the HIV virus that takes a long time to become detectable and an even longer time to affect the life of its host. And in the end it is incurable and fatal. On the other hand, if only one state were infected this creates a putry dish for the rest of us to watch and learn from while not being affected ourselves.

We need the vaccine. In the first case we could inject ourselves and wait 20 years to figure out, "Nope that is not what we wanted." or "Oops, that didn't work like I thought it would." Make a change and start all over. Instead, what about trying 50 different vaccines at one time. Better yet, let each state come up with their own vaccine. The idea of having 50 "individuals" working on this problem creates competition and competition creates better products (vaccines).

The key is survival. If we want to survive we have to adapt and to adapt is to be genetically diverse. Our founding fathers knew this and loosely bound this Republic together with a common set of ideals, the Constitution, but allowed each state to be its own individual.

Aninimity

To have an open and unbiased discussion I think it is important for me to remain anonymous. This way it is more difficult for people to "read in" meaning to my posts. Of course meaning may be there, but hopefully it directs the commentator to narrow their focus a little. Think of me as a student, your humble student. Also, I am going to allow anonymous posts because it makes it much easier for someone to post a comment without having to jump through lots of hoops.

Introduction

First, let me introduce myself and tell you who I am and most importantly, who I am not.

I am someone who likes to think about things that others do not; at least that has been my impression. I like asking questions like who am I? Where did I come from? Why am I here? Where am I going? What is justice? What is liberty? What is governments role in my life? What should it be? These thoughts could pop into my head any time of the day; when I am driving in the car, washing the dishes, doing my job, or watching tv.

Plato said the best way to do philosophy is through dialog. I don't think I get enough of that. So, I am starting this blog to get a chance to see other peoples points of view on those topics and to learn from them...to dialog.

I am neither a writer nor speller so do not criticize me for those short coming instead criticize the content of my posts.