A Radical Proposal

Resolved: Congress shall make no law.

…

…

What?

Oh, you're waiting for the rest of it -- as in the First Amendment, which begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion…"?

Sorry to disappoint you. But that is my proposal: For its full session, Congress shall make no law. Period. Not one. Not a big one, not a small one. None.

Instead, I propose that Congress look over every law that it has passed since the full ratification of the Constitution, and evaluate whether that law really needs to be on the books.

Why would I suggest that? Because the United States suffers from far too many laws -- jurisrrhea -- and we can get rid of many, if not most, of those laws and not only not suffer ill effects, but probably see a sudden upsurge in prosperity.

How would this work? I don't know all the proper procedures, but I'd like to suggest a few general guidelines for the process.

First, this freeze on lawmaking would of course not affect the power of Congress to declare war under the terms provided for that in the Constitution.

Second, because there are in general too many laws, a two-thirds majority (67% of all those voting) would be required to keep a law as it is, unchanged. This restriction is so strict in an attempt to reduce the chances of partisanship bias (whichever party controls Congress, if either, at the time the review begins) and instead focus on the laws that are truly necessary and beneficial to the country and its citizens.

Third, if a clause or article of the Constitution has been affected (read: changed and/or mangled) by an Amendment passed after 1789, that Amendment should be subject to the same analysis, and possibly even re-submitted to the People for ratification. (Without going into detail, I'm thinking specifically of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Amendments, but the principle applies in general as well.)

Finally and most importantly, each and every Representative and Senator should be given a copy of the pertinent sections of the Constitution -- say, Article I, Section 8, which enumerates the powers of Congress (with a bolded reminder that just because Congress has the power doesn't mean they have to exercise the power); Article I, Section 9, which places restrictions on actions of Congress; a boldfaced reminder of Article VI, Clause 3, which reminds the good Congress members that they are bound by oath to uphold the Constitution; and the Bill of Rights. Those texts will be the test against which all laws are measured.

Perhaps the most important text for Congress to refer to during this exercise is the Tenth Amendment, which states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

It's time Congress remembered that and focused their lawmaking (or in this case, law-revoking) efforts on those powers that it legitimately has.

Background Reading and Spiffy Disclaimer Thingie

I'll be posting some meaty topics in the next few weeks, and just to make sure there's a handy reference to background references and information, this post is to collect, over time, offsite links to explanations of material that may not be familiar to people, but which I'll reference in the coming posts.

I like to use the personality framework of Beck and Cowan's Spiral Dynamics. Rather than read the book (which is dry as dust in most places, and overly technical for what it is), the Wikipedia article gives a reasonable basic explanation. This is where terms like "first tier" and "second tier" and color references (i.e., blue/ORANGE) are explained.

As I said in earlier posts, this blog is intended in part to be a discussion of topics from an integral point of view. I will sometimes reference the four quadrants as I discuss various topics.

One word of caution -- while the Wikipedia links give a good general overview, they can come across as slightly hero-worshipful of Ken Wilber. I have great respect for Wilber and his work, most notably A Brief History of Everything, but I don't think he's 100% correct in his work, nor is his work complete. Linking to the Wikipedia articles should not be taken as any kind of endorsement from or by me for that kind of hero worship. I don't believe hero worship is appropriate in an integral approach.

Likewise, I'll sometimes make reference to posts by other integral bloggers -- and sometimes I'll take issue with them. My purpose in doing so is simply to explore other perspectives. I may take issue with ideas or statements rather vigorously (I love a good debate; not an argument, a debate), but I certainly mean no personal insult to anyone I disagree with.

Next week, the meaty topics begin.

So, what's with the title?

A holon is, in this sense a whole that is also (capable of being) a part of a larger whole. An atom, for example, is whole in itself and can also be part of a molecule, which in turn can also be part of a cell, and so on.

As I read about holons (in Ken Wilber's work, A Brief History of Everything, the term "holonic irrigation" occurred to me in one of those flashes of insight or amusement I sometimes get, and it has stuck with me all these months since I finished the book. The phrase works as a title for my blog for a couple of reasons.

First, I've long believed that any philosophy, belief system, or religion that can't stand to have a little fun poked at it now and again is unhealthy and probably needs to die. So, I'm poking just a little fun at Integral Philosophy by choosing a play on "colonic irrigation."

Second, irrigation helps things grow. In this particular case, the blog is, I hope, a tool for the growth not only of myself but other individual holons who might happen to read this blog.

So there's the explanation of the title. Nothing profound, but that's okay. Not everything has to be profound.

Welcome

I've been thinking about starting a blog for a while, but never thought I had anything of use to say.

Then I started reading Ken Wilber's A Brief History of Everything and Beck and Cowan's Spiral Dynamics. These excited me in a lot of ways, and so I went looking on the web for more resources and discussion boards to talk about these things in some depth. It pains me to say it, but I didn't find much of interest to me.

I thought about what I might say in a blog, and even came up with the title Holonic Irrigation several months ago. I just still dithered around and never actually created the blog. My husband, Thomas, finally said that I should, if for no other reason than, "The title is too good not to use."

So here it is. I'll be posting about integral stuff and the Spiral, but, since this blog is about the holon that is Peggy, I'll also post about my other interests, like writing. You'll probably find a few book and movie reviews here, too, eventually.

I expect I'll post about once a week, though it may be more or less frequent, depending on how much I have to say at any given time.