>
> John Adams once said, "It is by balancing each of these powers against
> the other two, that the efforts in human nature toward tyranny can
> alone be checked and restrained, and any degree of freedom preserved
> in the Constitution."
>
> At least the checks and balances are a system for separation of
> powers. It is there to make sure that no one group or branch of
> government can have exclusive control. Each of the three branches has
> their own powers to check the action of the other branches. The three
> branches are legislative, judicial, and executive. The legislative
> branch is Congress and they pass the laws. The executive branch that
> is the president administers and enforces the laws. The judicial
> branch is the courts that interpret the laws. These separation of
> powers are established in Articles I, II, and III of the
> Constitution.
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> At each layer we need to fight against the ape in man, man. We need to
> at every level some group that checks that level and someone that
> checks that group. Or life will become "solitary, poor, nasty,
> brutish, and short." else you get Bush/Hitler/stalin salad!
>
> Hobbes
>
> During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in
> awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as
> is of every man against every man. In this state any person has a
> natural right to do anything to preserve his own liberty or safety,
> and life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." ...in the
> international arena, states behave as individuals do in a state of
> nature.
>
> Within the state of nature there is no injustice, since there is no
> law, excepting certain natural precepts, the first of which is "that
> every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining
> it". ; and the second is "that a man be willing, when others are so
> too, as far forth as for peace and defence of himself he shall think
> it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented
> with so much liberty against other men as he would allow other men
> against himself". . From this, ...the way out of the state of nature
> [is] into civil government by mutual contract. (bellum omnium contra
> omnes)
>
>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_nature
>
> If a nation were a machine, here's how you could build it using
> subsumption architecture:
>
> You start with towns. You get a town's logistics ironed out: basic
> stuff like streets, plumbing, lights, and law. Once you have a bunch
> of towns working reliably, you make a county. You keep the towns going
> while adding a layer of complexity that will take care of courts,
> jails, and schools in a whole district of towns. If the county
> apparatus were to disappear, the towns would still continue. Take a
> bunch of counties and add the layer of states. States collect taxes
> and subsume many of the responsibilities of governing from the county.
> Without states, the towns would continue, although perhaps not as
> effectively or as complexly. Once you have a bunch of states, you can
> add a federal government. The federal layer subsumes some of the
> activities of the states, by setting their limits, and organizing work
> above the state level. If the feds went away the thousands of local
> towns would still continue to do their local jobs -- streets, plumbing
> and lights. But the work of towns subsumed by states and finally
> subsumed by a nation is made more powerful. That is, towns organized
> by this subsumption architecture can build, educate, rule, and prosper
> far more than they could individually. The federal structure of the
> U.S. government is therefore a subsumption architecture.
>
