From: Hoanh Dinh Tran <0003752801@mcimail.com>
Subject: POL/PHILO -- Democracy -- Part 2
Originator: daemon@media.mit.edu
Reply-To: 0003752801@mcimail.com
Organization: N/A
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 17:47:21 GMT

Hi SCVers:

I sent this message out on Sunday.  Well, as normal business in these 
days, my message seems to still wander on a winding frolic and detour
somewhere in Alice's wonderland, probably having a feast with
Michaelangelo.  :-( >:-(

So, here it is again.  My sincere apology if it decides to appear
twice finally.

Me^'n
Hoa`nh

Date:     Sun Apr 05, 1992  5:50 pm  GMT
From:     Hoanh Dinh Tran / MCI ID: 375-2801
 
TO:       scv
          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
          MBX: scv@haydn.stanford.edu
CC:       vaef-mem
          EMS: INTERNET / MCI ID: 376-5414
          MBX: vaef-mem@umbc3.umbc.edu
Subject:  POL/PHILO -- Democracy -- Part 2
Message-Id: 62920405175026/0003752801PK1EM
 
Hi everyone:

In the first part of this Democracy series, we have determined our
analytical approach and extract the most universal characteristics
in human society as the starting point of our analysis.  Our 
analytical approach is the application of practical and pragmatic
logics to daily human behavior to understand the collective
political behavior.   The universal characteristics we find in human
society are "an association of people with the common goal of
preserving internal peace."  See Part I (original and revisited) and
Huy Thanh Cao's comments to Part I.

Now we proceed further in our journey and ask the next question:
If each human society is an association of people with the
essential goal of preserving internal peace, then how does the
society achieve that goal?

(Please keep in mind that we are still at the stage of
formulating the Democracy concept, in an effort to truly 
understand the practical and pragmatic meaning of Democracy).

To answer this question, we need to look closer at the individual
units of society, namely each person in the society, because preserving
internal peace simply means keeping individual members from breaching
the peace.  Individual members' behavior is essential in the
collective peace making process.

The characteristics of human being is such that each individual is a
distinct, unique being.  Although we all share some common human 
trace, there is no doubt that each of us is sufficiently different
and separate from the rest of mankind to make us individual and unique.
The two elements -- uniqueness and separateness -- of individuals create
two phenomena:  Oftentime we think differently and cannot read each other's
thoughts.  Each human has his/her own desires and wishes that more than
often are different or contrary to someone else's wishes.  A farmer may
want to burn the woods to till the land; a woodcutter, however, would want
to preserve the woods for his livelihood.  I may want to build a dam on
the stream to steer it into my land; farmers downstream, however, may find
that threatening to their crops.  Even when no conflict of interest exists,
people with the same interest may collide head-on into each other because
they cannot read each other's mind.  A common scene to illustrate this
problem is two pedestrians banging head-on into each other because
neither knows the other one is going right or left.

Conflicts of interests and inability to read others' thoughts inevitably
brings actual conflicts -- war and breach of the peace -- if there is
nothing to prevent and resolve conflicts.  Thus, preserving internal peace
now requires a conflict prevention and dispute resolutions system.  Such a
system is what we can call informally a system of law (or law and order).
The law shall say whether the farmer can burn the woods to till the land,
or how much woods he can burn and what must be left for woodcutters.
The law shall tell riders  to stay on the right (or left) to keep
the roads free of accidents.  If a farmer burns too much woods, the law
shall make him responsible for his behavior and shall force him to cure his
transgression, such as compensating woodcutters for lost woods (instead of
letting wooodcutters angry and, say, committing violence and, thus,
breaching the peace).

Thus, the law set down a model of behavior to govern every
individual's conduct.  Each society member must follow this model
in order for society to keep its internal peace.  To make sure that
the model behavior is followed by each member, the law shall punish
its transgressors (and at times may reward its upholders).

____________
Footnote:

   As mentioned above, we use the term "law" here in its informal meaning.
"Law" here may not be restricted soly in its legal sense.  The "law" here may
include all rules of human conduct, including norms and customs, moral 
rules, ethical rules, etc...  These less formal rules are different from
"legal laws" only in their formality and the strength of enforcement --
very much a difference in degree and little in subtance.  These diferences
are not yet crucial for our analysis at this point, as we are not yet in
legal analysis but still in political philosophical analysis of a much
broader concept, which is Democracy.

End of footnote
________________

For a system of law to exist, however, there must exist an
adminstrator (or administrators) of the law.  There must be
someone to write the law, because not everyone can write or
even wants to write laws (everyone has his/her concern for 
his/her bread and butter as the first priority).  There must be
someone to put apparently conflicting laws into a coherent and
understandble system.  Then, there must be someone to enforce 
laws.  If each citizen can enforce the laws as he/she wishes, then
the system of law will be subjected to many conflicting 
interpretations, many subjective enforecements and, thus, chaos
and breach of the peace will surely entail.

The administors of the law, thus, is a must for the system to
operate.  These administrators can be called by a common term
"the government."

Thus, at this point in our analysis, we have found:  Each human
society is an association of people with the essential goal of
preserving internal peace.  To achieve this goal, each society
needs a system of law and a government.

In the next part, we will study various structures of government
(or various political structures), including the democratic
structure to see how each structure effects the essential societal
goal of "preserving the peace."

_________________

Footnote:  At this point, we can almost see clearly that Democracy
is only one of the possible political structures to achieve the goal
of preserving internal peace.  Democracy is only a means, preserving
internal peace is the goal.  This simple idea is gravely misunderstood
by many people.  Many would think of Democracy as the ultimate goal
for a society.  This is simply confusing the means and the end.
Preserving internal peace is the ends.  Democracy, or any other political
structure, is only a means to that end.  As long as we keep this simply
concept clear in mind, we can save much confusion later on in our
political thinking process.

End of footnote
____________________

That is the end of part two in this seven part series.
Thank you for following through with this article.

My sincere wish of a good week for everyone.

Outside, the sky is of an opaque milky blue, but the sun is bright
and the crystal rays carry soft glinters on the tips of the
willow branches.  A sparrow flutters up and down, crossing and
recrossing, the age, fading cottony jetline across the sky.
Good time for a picnic at Greatfalls or a long ride south on 95
to the Appalachian range lying quietly in its smoky grey silhouette
at the southwestern end of the ragged skyline.  Let's ride!  To free
our spirit, to breathe in sap of life that the crunch of
daily technology has all but inter under the well worn
carpet of our grey, sulky offices. :-) :-) :-)

Good day, everyone.

Me^'n
Hoa`nh