Part One.....INTRODUCTION Origins The Circular Foundations of Constitutionalism The Rising Importance of Environmental Limits The Progressive Constitutional Response Universality The Purposes of Government The Pitfalls of Democracy What Can We Do NOW? The Syntropic Model

Part One INTRODUCTION Origins Written constitutions did not exist at the beginning of time. Nor did they come into being immediately after the origin of writing. They evolved only after certain, prerequisite factors were part of the human condition. The erosion of unwritten bonds that once held traditional communities together; the rise of larger, more complex societies; and the entropic decay of centralized, religious or absolutist authority made it necessary for humans to devise instruments that would supplement or replace the old traditions and mores. People sought for, and found, new ways to establish lawful relations among the relative strangers who were living together in more and more complicated societies. Written constitutions were the almost inevitable result. Early charters added regularity to social and economic transactions as well as a more coherent means of sharing and transferring power. They also afforded some flexibility in relation to the internal and external forces that inevitably oppose established social order. They offered new means--and provided new human resources--for coping with all these threats. The challenges, of course, had to be met by responses that were in keeping with the regionally prevailing levels of economic, political, and cultural development. The new constitutions that were created have continued to evolve as a result of changing demands from their human and other natural environments. The Circular Foundations of Constitutionalism To articulate the essentials of this process a little differently, the constitutional foundation of a body politic, like the genetic code of a biological organism, may be seen to contain a basic set of instructions for the design of a living system--and, like the DNA of any other wild animal, political DNA is modified over time by the rigors of natural selection. Unlike biological DNA, however, political constitutions are also created and self-consciously processed within a social network of individual human minds. Because social information is symbolic in nature, and because symbols are more easily manipulated than the elements of biological systems, social revolutions can take place much more rapidly than biological revolutions. Further, both individual and social self-consciousness are highly dependent on culturally mediated information. Modern culture, in turn, is constrained by its mass media and by the special, economic interests that dominate life in modern societies. These large private interests, along with their supporting educational institutions and the mass media, therefore, are highly influential in the survival, self-replication, and evolution of democratic constitutions which, in circular causal fashion, preserve the structure and content of the economic process, of the mass media, and of educational as well as other institutions. The Rising Importance of Environmental Limits Although some human systems appear ultrastable, a destabilizing force has entered this self-reinforcing circle. Biological growth has taken us near the limits of the Earth's ability to support economic growth. Consequently, environmental conditions--both political and natural--are now changing rapidly, perhaps more rapidly and with greater impact on humans than during any other period in human history. Along with these changing conditions there is a changing human consciousness. Social consciousness, unfortunately, appears to lag dangerously behind the looming environmental threats--primarily because the special interests that control the flow of information tend to bias that flow in favor of themselves rather than in the best interests of the whole community. Given the rapidly changing ecosystems and other cause-effect processes that affect our legal foundations, it is likely that democratic constitutions--and whole societies--will undergo dramatic changes by the middle years of the 21st century. The predominant theme underlying those changes will undoubtedly be a shift toward increasing concerns about individual and family survival as well as for the survival of the human species. Because of the growing interdependence among all human systems, the changes that occur will either be consistent with improved survivability for human societies and for the whole human race--or survivability and the quality of human life will decrease. The Progressive Constitutional Response If human systems and their constitutions tend to change in the direction of progress toward improved survivability, and if global communication and exchange processes promote evolution of societies and cultures toward a more fair and effective model, then each political charter will likely evolve along lines of progression toward some future, universalized, model constitution--or in aberrant regression away from that model. The process will be similar to that which would occur if the members of any particular community were to consciously agree on a desired, or ideal, social system. Progress toward that ideal model could be measured by comparing it periodically with past and present systems. Creating Democracy In Time (Foreman, 1994) contains a proposal for a new model of democracy that would more effectively cope with the dangers facing the post-modern world while at the same time realizing more fully the ideas and spirit of democracy. The Universal Model, which may be seen as either an independent volume or as a companion to Creating Democracy In Time, contains a proposal for a model constitution that may be used by any community aspiring toward what is called a ``syntropic democracy.'' In effect, the present volume begins to specify, at the level of constitutional structure, what a syntropic democracy would be. As noted above and in the previous work, however, ecosystems and cultural systems continually require of democracy higher degrees of adaptive intelligence. The Universal Model incorporates the concept of social justice within the idea of adaptive intelligence, then attempts to make adaptiveness to rapid change an explicit part of the developing democracy. Since democracies do not spring like Athena from the head of Zeus, they must evolve from, survive within, and contribute to the evolution of matter-energy and information in the Universe. The progressive response places these realities at the center of its worldview while raising the value of human life and its evolution above the value of property and profits. It is hoped that people striving to initiate democracy will consider founding their new systems with a constitution based on the ``universal model.'' Those political systems that are already self-described ``democracies'' and that find themselves at an impasse with regard to further progress, may discover in the ``universal model'' an instrument which they can use to facilitate progress toward a higher level of democracy. If the model is perceived to be one that is approaching universal acceptance, and one toward which existing constitutions seem to be evolving, then it will indeed fit some definitions of a ``universal model.'' Universality Several existing constitutions, of course, have already served as models for the creation of newer constitutions. However, a model does not achieve universality by social acceptance alone. Part of its candidacy for the reputation of universal validity rests in the degree to which it's general truths can be translated into specific, local truths; part depends on the model's internal coherence and its built-in strategies for transcending the inevitable problems and paradoxes that will develop as the model is applied; and part is predicated upon the model's ability to resonate with its species of origin. The universal model obviously originates in, and is intended to further organize, the human species. Its success, therefore, depends upon its ability to meet the demands for human survival and to facilitate the evolution of the human species to higher levels of adaptive organization. The model presented in Part Two can also lay claim to a degree of universality in that it was developed from, and remains part of, a general theory of organization. It was derived thusly so that it could be adapted to any level of human self-governance and into any of the quite different human cultures that exist. The general theory of organization that was utilized is briefly described in Appendix 1 of Creating Democracy In Time and will not be repeated in the present volume. The Purposes of Government At the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 an almost unanimous consensus developed around the central purposes of a republic. These purposes were repeatedly affirmed by participants to be the protection of ``life, liberty, and property.'' [McDonald, 1985] From a syntropic perspective [see Creating Democracy In Time for a description of the syntropic paradigm] it appears that this consensus was slightly off base. Although ``property'' was undoubtedly understood by some of the founders to mean more than privately-owned material wealth, property--unless redefined as nature--is, after all, secondary to life and to the conditions that make human life possible. Only one of the Founders at the 1787 meeting in Philadelphia, James Wilson, approached the issue of purpose from a perspective that is compatible with that taken here. According to McDonald, The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, [ed. Max Farrand, 1937] show that: ``James Wilson alone departed entirely from the consensus: rejecting the idea that the protection of property was `the sole or the primary' purpose of government, he asserted that `the cultivation & improvement of the human mind was the most noble object' of government and society. [McDonald, 1985] Basing a society on the concepts of ``life, liberty, and property,'' it might have been predicted, led to a social evolution in which the private ownership of material property competes on an equal basis with life and liberty, with property sometimes yielding to life or liberty and sometimes superceding both. Further, by improperly placing property--especially privately-owned property--at such a preeminent level, other values essential to the evolution of life are neglected to the great detriment of humanity and of all living systems. Another consequence, it could be argued, was the dialectical response of those human systems that attempted to abolish private property altogether--creating other kinds of tragedies and setting in motion the conflicting forces that led to the superpower arms race and nearly destroyed human civilization. The model constitution, presented in Part Two of this book, attempts to redress this imbalance by specifically requiring that the individual and collective interests competing over property exist in balanced proportions--with exchanges among all economic units regulated by a political community that steadily maintains the health and quality of living systems at the core of the heterarchy of human values. The Pitfalls of Democracy In its ancient Athenian origins, and especially from its modern reincarnation until now, democracy has rather thoroughly revealed its weaknesses as a ``genetic program'' for human communities. Most of these weaknesses are still not addressed by the world's installed base of democratic constitutions. Among the problems of democracy we can count (1) the continual attempt by special interests to steal the wealth of the commons, (2) incomplete or unfair representation for minorities, women, and the poor, (3) a growing disparity between rich and poor, (4) unfairly structured electoral processes, (5) a lack of integration among nations, (6) the absence of measures to protect the natural environment and to control population growth, (7) the inordinate influence of lobbyists, (8) pervasive distortions of information by mass media that are dominated by special interests, (9) an increasing degree of information overload, (10) the inadequacy of educational institutions in preparing citizens to participate in the multicultural and increasingly complex process of democratic decision-making, and (11) the ``demosclerotic'' web of entitlements that has accompanied the struggle for a greater share of the ``welfare state.'' Each of these problems, along with the many supranational problems that are defying solution by anything less than a democratically controlled global authority, are taken up in the model. What Can We Do NOW? Since it usually takes a few years to amend an established constitution and often longer to install a new one, the question arises: what can we do ``here and now.'' The answer requires thoughtful reflection. Two basic strategies exist: (1) reform existing democracies, and (2) create new democracies. An effort to reform existing democracies may have to be sustained over many years, and the opportunities to create new democracies--while plentiful at the level of small scale organization--occur more rarely at national, continental, and global levels; and they require a long organizational buildup. Whether the situation requires a focus on reforming an existing system or on creating a new one, the following steps must be taken: 1. form a group based on the principles of the model constitution, 2. raise money, 3. campaign to implement elements of this constitution at the system level of your focus. If your goal is to reform an existing ``democracy,'' add the following priorities: 1. changes in the ownership and control of mass media, 2. changes in campaign financing and the establishment of a one- term limit for all elective positions, 3. changes in the lobbying laws, 4. proportional representation at all levels and in most organizations, 5. appropriate extensions of democratic principles into all spheres of life--especially into the structure of corporations, 6. changes in educational systems and in social science priorities, 7. a comprehensive and effective system for control of corruption in government that will help reestablish trust in the democratic process. Specific detail regarding these suggested changes and extensions of democracy can be found in the body of the proposed model constitution or in Creating Democracy In Time. The above changes are interrelated. All are essential, and no one of them could survive long without the others. The Syntropic Model The model, presented in Part Two of this book, is designed to be of assistance in the process of reform as well as in the constitution-making of newly democratic societies. It helps lay the groundwork for a systematic reconstruction of the democratic process. Depending on the context in which it is applied, it may be incomplete or ambiguous. It contains clauses that could be inappropriate in some cultural and political circumstances. It lacks others that may be sorely needed. It is not, therefore, a constitution ready to go into effect as a body of law for every situation. It is an invitation, if you will, to join with others in the process of creating a new covenant. It is a statement of values and beliefs, a position paper, a declaration of intent, even a manifesto for the emerging world system. Hopefully, it will be useful to people who are attempting to organize a higher level of democracy. It addresses some glaring deficits, some of them mentioned above, that exist in most ``democratic'' constitutions. It provides a basis for the purposeful integration, with local and global system goals, of the human species within a healthier biosphere. The reader is invited to send questions relating to the model, or suggestions for improving it, to the publisher. The author of each idea that is incorporated into the next edition will, when possible, receive credit and a free copy of the revised text. If the model is seasoned by suggestions and by practical applications in localities around the world, yet still retains its independence from local exigencies, it may yet rise toward that ``cake'' which can be so universally enjoyed that even the likes of Marie Antoinette could not hoard it. Next chapter...