Welcome to...


3 domain names

  1 academic objective

Build support within the field of political science...

  i.e., our nation's academic experts on the democratic process,

and among the vast mainstream of America's ~155 million voters...

  i.e., where the "buck should stop" in a democratic society,
  for the creation and accreditation of a new field of study:
S-G Science:

the study of Effective Self-Governance Theories, Models & Strategies


This web page's content (text and graphics) is a preliminary whiteboard outline for a series of YouTube/PowerPoint presentations.

More material needs to be added, followed by a fair amount of editing. However, the process is far enough along that interested parties, particularly political scientists and civics educators (and their students), political journalists, good government advocates, etc. will be able to explore and ponder this page's new body of "self-governance" (S-G) knowledge.


Note to first time visitors,

It may help if you adopt the mindset of an explorer -- in this case, of new knowledge. However, not just any explorer, but one who is extraordinarily brave (not unlike daring explorers of old who sailed into uncharted waters, undaunted by the dangers of the unknown).

Brave? Daring?

Yes, very much so.

As you are about to "discover," you have just (metaphorically speaking) set foot on the shore of an unexplored continent teeming with an extraordinarily rare type of new knowledge:

  • paradigm-shifting,
  • status quo-disrupting,
  • course-of-history-changing.

With that (suspenseful) imagery in mind...

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

"There is one thing stronger than all the armies of the world, and that is an idea whose time has come."
Victor Hugo
(H/t CH)


Introduction: Why S-G Science is a field of study "whose time has come."

What we know...

  • Roughly half of America's ~155 million voters can be classified as left-of-center (LOC) voters because they always or almost always vote Democratic -- the other half, right-of-center (ROC) voters, because they always/almost always vote Republican.

  • Sizable numbers in both groups, especially (but not limited to) our most passionate liberals and conservatives, have the mindset of "warrior-voters" because they exist in a permanent state of political/ideological (PI) war against each other.
    • The national legislative election process (NLEP) is used to determine which side's "warrior-politicians" will get to call the shots AND control the purse strings in the U.S. House and Senate (minimally, until the next round of bloodless battles).
    • Increasingly, our voters' PI war is fought over which of two radically different nations America will be.
      • liberal/socialist (= considerably greater control by the federal government over every aspect of peoples' daily lives).
      • conservative/libertarian (= considerably less control by the federal government over every aspect of peoples' daily lives).

  • A substantial number of LOC and ROC voters don't like each other merely because of their political/ideological views.
    • That number is growing, and the intensity of dislike is increasing.

  • If the history of failing democracies is a guide:
    • Our nation's "mountain" of major economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems will continue growing in both size and severity.
    • Political/ideological tensions (and contempt) between LOC and ROC voters will continue to increase until an inflection point in America's history will occur: the most extreme elements (along with the most desperate elements) within both camps will begin resorting to violence.
      • When that happens, the America most of us were born into and/or grew up in will disappear forever.

A reasonable person would conclude that America's two warring PI factions couldn't possibly have anything in common when it comes to the legislative agenda our U.S. Congress should be pursuing to deal with America's myriad of problems.

Fortunately (for our nation's future), that reasonable person's conclusion, although perfectly reasonable, would be wrong.

Absolutely, positively, 100% WRONG.


What we don't know, but need to if we want to "save"
  our democracy...

    key acronyms (partial list)

  • ANI: apolitical/non-ideological
  • EFFS: economic, financial, fiscal, societal
  • NLEP: national legislative election process
  • PAP: politically ambitious "politician"
  • PKQ: philosopher king/queen
  • BW: bloodless war
  • SC: strategic cooperation
  key concepts (partial list)
  • effective S-G
  • PKQ-caliber legislator
  • BW theory & model of S-G
  • SC theory & model of S-G
  • dysfunctionalizing legislation
  • dysfunctionalizing legislative provisions
  • legislative policy formulation process
  • optimizing legislation
  • system(s) optimization
    • free market, financial, health care, public education, mental health, criminal justice, immigration, tax,...
  • PAP-controlled Congress, a.k.a. PAP-governed democracy (= dystopic democracy)
  • PKQ-controlled Congress, a.k.a. PKQ-governed democracy (= neartopic democracy)

Nearly all of our mainstream voters -- and a significant number of our hard core liberal and conservative warrior-voters -- actually want Congress to pursue the same legislative agenda to -- not deal with -- but actually solve America's myriad of problems.

They just don't know it, yet.

For that S-G "fact" to become glaringly self-evident, our voters will need to possess a working knowledge of a small number of new, uniquely 21st century S-G concepts -- most notably, the concept of effective self-governance.

Knowledge of effective S-G will give voters S-G "superpowers"

For now, think of effective S-G as the ability of mainstream LOC and ROC voters to define and identify, then recruit and elect, (mostly) liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans to Congress who:

  • are a modern democracy's equivalent of philosopher kings and queens (PKQs) -- meaning, highly capable individuals, but without (relatively speaking) self-serving, politically ambitious or power hungry bones in their bodies.
  • understand up front that, if elected to the House or Senate, they will only be serving for a "few years" as a one-time civic duty -- because both they and our voters understand just how easily political power, especially at the national legislative level, can corrupt even the best of us.

Unlike the self-serving PAPs our voters have been electing to Congress for generations/centuries, PKQ-caliber Democrats and Republicans will easily be capable of joining together and solving America's mountain of major EFFS problems -- no matter which party controls either chamber in a given legislative session.

Moreover, in many cases, the problems will be solved completely and permanently -- with legislative solutions that voters from across the political/ideological spectrum will strongly support.

aside: by anyone's definition, the ability of our voters to accomplish that S-G feat easily qualifies as a S-G superpower.









Finally, in terms of how quickly that mountain can be turned into a molehill, with PKQ-caliber Ds and Rs crafting the legislation, many of our EFFS problems will be solved relatively quickly. Obviously, a few of them, e.g., our massive annual budget deficits and national debt, will have to be put on a decades long solution-glide path.

Three key takeaways:

  1. When enough of our voters possess a working knowledge of S-G science's core concepts (5-10% in my view) -- almost overnight (thanks to social media), our nation's level of sophistication re the "process" of effective S-G will increase substantially.

  2. Once political ambition, political power lust, and "self-serving-ism" have been "removed" from both chambers of Congress, we will "discover" that our national legislature will be able to (collectively) legislate and carry out their government oversight and foreign policy duties with the:
    • intelligence of an Einstein,
    • wisdom of a Solomon,
    • logic of a Mr. Spock,
    • ingenuity of a MacGyver,
    • vision of a Steve Jobs,
    • compassion of a Mother Teresa,
    • moral compass of a Nelson Mandela,
    • common sense of a Mark Twain.
  3. The icing on the cake: When PKQ-controlled Congresses become a permanent fixture of American democracy, the "imperial" presidency will become a vestige of the past. The Executive Branch will revert to the way our founders had originally intended it: responsible for implementing and enforcing the laws passed by the Legislative Branch.

Clearly, the idea of our Congress being controlled by PKQ-caliber legislators sounds like the storyline for a Hollywood fantasy movie. And no one in their right mind could seriously think that any national legislature -- even one overflowing with PKQs -- could ever turn America's EFFS mountain into a molehill -- at least, not without a massive amount of pain and suffering borne by everyone (but the super wealthy), but especially by our society's poorest and least capable.

Yet, believe it or not, both of those outcomes are obtainable -- and the latter with relatively little discomfort.

Ironically, the only really hard part will be recognizing (or acknowledging to yourself) that both the greatest existential threat to American democracy --as well as the greatest obstacle to America achieving broad based, widespread prosperity...

IS NOT the Democrats!! or the Republicans!!

IS NOT liberalism!! or conservatism!!

IS NOT liberal!! or conservative!! policies, values, principles, etc.

IS NOT Citizens United, dark money, gerrymandering, right-wing militia groups, Antifa, Black Lives Matter, fake news, wokeism, Donald Trump, collusion between the Democrats and liberal media,...

It's PAP/PAP-controlled Congresses.

PAP-controlled Congress: the working term for describing a U.S. House and Senate that is "permanently" dominated and controlled by politically ambitious politicians (PAPs) who, no matter how well meaning they may be, or how sincere their political/ideological intentions -- with exceedingly rare exception, care far more about:

  • their political careers,
  • the perks and privileges that come with national legislative office,
  • acquiring political power -- largely for its own sake, and/or
  • wielding political power -- because it has become a powerful aphrodisiac,

... than they care about doing what is in the best interest of their nation.

Why our LOC and ROC voters have never made the effort to "solve" their PAP-controlled Congress problem is a question for another time.

Suffice to say, better late than never.

To that end, you are about to be introduced to a new category of S-G knowledge founded on a new, "corrective" theory of S-G:

the Strategic Cooperation (SC) Theory.

In a nutshell, the SC theory says that if LOC and ROC voters identify, recruit and elect PKQ-caliber candidates to Congress, Congress will be able to perform their government oversight and foreign policy duties spectacularly AND keep their nation as free of EFFS problems as it is humanly possible to do -- again, no matter which party controls either chamber in a given legislative session.

As has been alluded to, this new theory is, by its very nature, paradigm-shifting, status quo-disrupting, and course-of-history-changing. Which means (assuming the history of such theories* is a guide) it will initially be rejected out of hand by nearly every rational thinking person: political scientists, members of academia writ large, among our political intelligentsia -- even you, brave explorer, as well.

* Modern medicine's Germ Theory and astronomy's theory of Heliocentrism are examples of corrective theories (or corrective knowledge). For example, the Germ Theory displaced medicine's two thousand year old, absurdly incorrect Four Humours Theory. While the Heliocentric Theory displaced astronomy's longstanding, but equally absurd, Geocentric Theory of the Solar System.

Because those two corrective theories were also paradigm-shifting, status quo-disrupting and course-of-history-changing, they were also initially dismissed (by nearly every educated, rational thinking individual) as quackery, lunacy, absurd nonsense, etc.

So, as you read on, don't be surprised when nearly every rational brain cell in your head "rejects" this new corrective theory.

fyi: not so much because the theory isn't spot on, but because it is impossible for you to imagine it ever being accepted by our political science establishment as an academically valid theory that should be taught to our nation's elementary, high school and college students.

Or it's impossible for you to imagine a critical mass of our nation's ~155 million voters deciding to start using it identify, recruit and elect their 535 members of Congress.

That said (and not to sound too melodramatic), the fate of our democracy quite possibly depends on everyone who visits this web page keeping the following question/thought foremost in the "rational thinking" portion of their brain as they read on:

Do I believe that the threat to our nation's economic, financial, fiscal and/or societal wellbeing -- perhaps even to our democracy, itself -- is great enough that our nation's best and brightest "political" thinkers in academia and elsewhere need to start thinking about and discussing -- among themselves, with their students, and with the American people -- these new corrective S-G concepts?

My hope is that, minimally, 50% + 1 of your neurons will answer in the affirmative.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

Re the term: democracy:

As everyone should have learned in their elementary and high school civics classes, America is not a democracy, strictly speaking, but a Constitutional Republic, or Democratic Constitutional Republic, or Constitutional Democratic Republic (just to name a few descriptors). For brevity, "democracy" is used as shorthand for the longer, correct terms.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide."
John Adams
(2nd U.S. Pres.)

"Democracy will inevitably become tyranny."

"The best argument against Democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." Winston Churchill


Why "It's the voter's fault" is an
"18th century" understanding of self-governance

The three above quotes pretty much explain why the prevailing view in political science is that -- like every democracy in history -- American democracy is going to fail. The only debate-worthy question is when, with some believing the process is already well underway.

And since, in a democracy, the buck stops with the voters, ipso facto: it's the voters' fault.

Clearly, there's something about nations governed "by the people" that, no matter how strong, healthy, prosperous or powerful they may get, they inevitably end up collapsing in upon themselves, becoming impoverished and indebted caricatures of their former greatness.

If they're lucky. If they aren't, they devolve into either left-wing (think: Venezuela), or right-wing (think: Russia), authoritarian, democracy-in-name-only nations.

In the case of American democracy, if you asked our nation's political scientists -- in fact, if you asked just about every learned individual -- what that something is, most would probably refer you to the third quote above (Churchill's). Meaning, it's the many shortcomings on the part of an embarrassingly large percentage of America's voters. Shortcomings like: uninformed, naive, gullible, apathetic -- and greedy, wanting more "free" stuff from Uncle Sam than they're willing to pay for in the form of taxes.

But perhaps worst of all, far too many voters have a "cognitive capacity" problem. As political psychologist, Shawn W. Rosenberg (University of California, Irvine), put it,

"...for the most part, people lack the requisite cognitive capacities for integration and abstraction needed for the kind of systemic understanding, considered judgment and critical reflection that liberal democracy requires of its citizenry."

TRANSLATION: not enough of our ~155 million voters are smart enough to engage in the process of self-governance competently or effectively.


LOC: left-of-center ROC: right-of-center

(too many of this group)

NOT smart enough

(not enough of this group)

smart enough

(not to scale)

On the surface, the logic behind this view seems rock solid since, clearly, a truly intelligent electorate would never allow their national legislature to be permanently hijacked by what our LOC and ROC voters have allowed their U.S. Congress to be hijacked by:

two warring factions of unaccountable, fiscally irresponsible, power-corrupted, perks-and-privileges-addicted, etc., etc. "warrior-politicians" (WPs) whose members -- while sincere and well-meaning (probably almost to a person) -- are also (for the most part) nakedly self-serving, blatantly craven "truth-twisters" who shamelessly rely on every politically ambitious politician's (PAP's) two most used (and unethical) tactics -- demagoguery and pandering -- to insure their repeated re-election bids and/or grow their, or their party's political power.

Here's the problem with our political scientists' "it's the voters' fault" theory for why American democracy is failing.

Leaving aside for the moment our voters' many non-cognitive shortcomings -- even if we stipulate that what Rosenberg and others say about our voters' intellectual "insufficiency" is 100% true -- cognitive inadequacy does not explain why our LOC and ROC voters keep Congress permanently filled to overflowing with self-serving, responsibility-phobic, influence-peddling, congenitally disingenuous, etc. PAPs...

fyi: generations of whom have shown themselves to be utterly incapable of solving any of America's major economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems (not even the easy ones) --

...any more than cognitive inadequacy explains why, for example:

  • mid 19th century medical doctors used Beavis-and-Butt-Head-level-of-idiocy "remedies" to treat infections and infectious diseases, e.g., bloodletting (in some cases, several pints) to reduce one's fever.
  • 16th century astronomers scoffed at the theory of Heliocentrism.
  • 1st century science-philosophers derided the "earth is round" theory.

Cutting to the chase -- if what we mean by: American democracy is failing is that:

  • Our U.S. Congress is so broken, so dysfunctional as to be incapable of governing our nation responsibly or competently -- because both factions of PAPs exist in a never-ending, all-consuming, all's-fair-in-love-and-political-war struggle for political power, much of it purely for power's sake.

  • Our national political discourse has been reduced to:
    • voters -- even highly intelligent and educated voters -- angrily screaming irrationally at (and past) each other,
    • panels of talking heads on nightly cable news outlets angrily screaming irrationally at (and past) each other,
    • politicians in Congress angrily screaming irrationally at (and past) each other (at least when the cameras are turned on),

  • Our nation is now buried under a mountain of major EFFS problems so large as to constitute multiple existential-level threats to our national wellbeing, beginning with (at the top of a long list) the almost certain inability of most of our middle class -- in the months and years ahead (due to AI, robotics, productivity gains, etc.) -- to continue maintaining their middle class standard of living with jobs that pay middle class wages --

...then American democracy is not failing because of our voters' cognitive inadequacies -- nor, as will soon become clear, because of our voters' other shortcomings. Rather, the blame rests squarely with Political Science's (unwritten) "18th century" Bloodless War (BW) Theory of Self-Governance.

In a nutshell, the BW theory is the theory we've been operating by since our nation's founding.

  • "politics" -- particularly in our national legislature -- is treated as bloodless war between factions of WPs, and
  • elections (for said W-Ps) are bloodless battles between factions of voters ("fought" in polling stations on election day) over which side's WPs get to call the shots AND control the purse strings in the legislature (minimally, until the next round of bloodless battles).

Seen through the lens of effective S-G, America's democracy has been slowly, steadily coming apart at the seams over a period of generations, because generations of our low and high cognitive functioning voters have bought into the BW theory of S-G.


"You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing reality obsolete."
Buckminster Fuller


S-G Science introduces a radically new concept:

competing theories (and models) of S-G,

into America's marketplace of new ideas.


reminder >> NLEP: National Legislative Election Process

The Bloodless War (BW) Theory of SG implies that:

America's voters should use their NLEP to achieve one political/ideological (PI) objective: decide which political party's WPs/WPs will control the House and Senate.

aside: Why a PI objective? Because, realistically, the choice for voters (for the last century) has come down to either a Democratic-controlled Congress pursuing their liberal legislative agenda, or a Republican-controlled Congress pursuing their conservative legislative agenda.

The Bloodless War (BW) Model's 2-Phase NLEP
(a.k.a. the Beavis and Butt-head model)

FYI: America's voters have always used a 2 Phase NLEP because they have always adhered to the BW theory of S-G.

Phase 1: LOC and ROC voters field W-Ps in their respective parties' primaries.

Phase 2: the W-Ps go head to head in the general election.


FYI: the BW theory explains why 21st century America's LOC and ROC voters are trapped in a part-Groundhog Day, part-Twilight Zone self-governance nightmare from which there seems no escape.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Strategic Cooperation (SC) Theory of S-G says that:

America's voters should use their NLEP to achieve two objectives.

The first, an apolitical/non-ideological (ANI) objective: decide if Congress' two chambers will be controlled by:

PKQ-caliber legislators or by PAPs.

The second, a PI objective: decide which political party's PKQ-caliber legislators (or just: PKQs) will control the House and Senate.


The Strategic Cooperation (SC) Model's 3-Phase NLEP
a.k.a. the Einstein model)

Phase 1: in advance of the House and Senate primary processes, "mainstream" LOC and ROC voters use a combination of social media tools, standard recruiting methods -- and yet to be developed "effective S-G strategies" -- to identify and aggressively recruit PKQ-caliber candidates to "run" in their respective House/Senate primaries.

Phase 2: LOC/ ROC voters field PKQ-caliber candidates in their respective House/Senate primaries.

Phase 3: PKQ-caliber candidates go head to head in the general election.


* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The Fundamental...
... of Effective S-G

In 21st century America, so long as Congress is permanently controlled by PAPs, it will not matter which political party is in power, or which legislative policies, e.g., liberal or conservative, they implement to deal with one or more of their nation's myriad of problems -- American democracy's downward spiral will continue, and the mountain of economic, financial, fiscal and societal (EFFS) problems America is buried under will continue growing larger.

However, if Congress is controlled by PKQ-caliber legislators, it will not matter which party controls the House or Senate in any given election cycle, America's EFFS problems will get solved -- in many cases, completely and permanently -- with legislation that is neither "liberal" nor "conservative," but will be strongly supported by significant majorities of Americans:

  • from across the political/ideological spectrum,
  • of every racial, religious and ethnic group,
  • of every age, income and educational level.



* * * * * * * * * * * * *



The following series of graphics provide a cause/effect
comparison of the BW and SC theories.

note: think of the vertical distribution curve as a standard bell-shaped curve rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise.



RESULT: voters use the BW
" model" in their NLEP

= 100% Bloodless War
(made sense in 18th c. America)
(in 21st c. America = 100% irrational)

RESULT: voters use the SC
" model" in their NLEP

= 90% Strategic Cooperation

10% Bloodless War
(=100% rational)


Dystopic democracy, or PAP-governed dem.:
a democracy whose national legislature stays permanently controlled by self-serving, politically ambitious/power hungry warrior-politicians (a.k.a. PAPs).

Neartopic democracy, or PKQ-governed dem.:
a democracy whose nat. legislature stays permanently controlled by NON-self-serving, NON-politically ambitious, NON-power hungry, NON-"politicians" (a.k.a. PKQ-caliber legislators).
  100% DYSTOPIC (Where we are) (Where 95%+ of us wish we where) 100% NEARTOPIC

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

FOOD FOR THOUGHT: How intelligent must a voter be to be able to recognize the "superiority" of the SC theory (and model) over the BW theory/model?

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

“One's mind, once stretched by a new idea, never regains its original dimension” Oliver Wendell Holmes Sr.


* * * * * * * * * * * * *

The "apolitical/non-ideological" (ANI) nexus
between 200+ years of PAP-controlled Congresses
and America's "mountain" of EFFS problems.

(fyi: this is a rough draft, needs major editing)


DL: Dysfunctionalizing Legislation
DLPs: Dysfunctionalizing Legislative Provisions

ANI: Apolitical/Non-Ideological

Optimizing Legislation
Systems Optimization

If we exempt feel good/happy legislation, e.g., declaring a certain day: national jump rope day -- and self-aggrandizing legislation, e.g., renaming a post office after a politician -- it's highly likely that nearly every other piece of legislation enacted into law by Congress (in recent decades, especially) was written -- either in its entirety for self-serving reasons -- or the legislation wasn't written for self-serving reasons, per se, but was laden with self-serving legislative provisions (courtesy of the PAPs crafting the legislation).

Provisions inserted, for example, to reward one or more of the politician's political party's clique of special interest groups, or a favored industry -- or for supporting the politician's re-election bid. Or to entice, bribe or appease said groups, industries, etc.

aside: provisions (or entire pieces of legislation) might even have been enacted to disadvantage -- or outright punish -- one or more of the other party's clique of special interests, businesses interests, political cronies, etc.

For purposes of definition, let's give self-serving legislation, and self-serving legislative provisions, unique names: DL and DLPs -- and create different categories of them.

  • Cronyism-laden legislation
  • Pandering legislation
  • Appeasing legislation
  • Wack-a-mole legislation, i.e., solves problem A at the expense of creating problem(s) B, C,...
  • Kick-the-can-down-the-road legislation

Now we are able to posit the following ANI hypothesis: Given enough DL and DLPs -- at some point, the cumulative effect will be to dysfunctionalize a nation's myriad of systems: free market system, healthcare system, financial system, tax system/code, criminal justice system, etc.



This next graphic is a useful way to visualize the cumulative impact (over a period of generations, even centuries in some cases) on America's major systems -- which, fyi, goes a long way toward explaining why those systems are not operating or functioning at their maximum health, strength, efficiency, effectiveness, etc.

Our severely dysfunctionalized systems are also (in this layman's view) one of the major factors, if not the major factor responsible for turning America's molehill of EFFS problems into the mountain it is today.

What 200+ years of PAP-controlled Congresses have given us


For comparative purposes...
what a few years of PKQ-controlled Congresses will give us:


Finally, our society should have the attitude:

Our nation's elected political class -- i.e., America's governing class -- should NOT be "controlled" by 535 self-serving PAPs, but by 535 non-self-serving, non-politically ambitious non-politicians -- a.k.a. PKQ-caliber legislators -- for the same reason the ultimate authority over our nation's military rests in the hands of elected civilians.





What if America's "mainstream" LOC and ROC voters (~140 million) gathered around a vast kitchen table to solve their nation's major EFFS problems -- and agreed that their first step should be to reach broad consensus on what America's major systems -- free market, healthcare, financial, tax, criminal justice, immigration, mental health, etc. -- would look like if they were "optimized," i.e., operating at the strongest, healthiest, most effective, most efficient, etc. possible.

fyi: the table would be ~ twice Earth's diameter.




In your opinion, is it likely or unlikely that substantial majorities in both groups of voters would:

  1. be able to reach broad consensus on what constituted "optimized" systems?
  2. want to solve their nation's EFFS problems -- not kick them down the road, paper over them, etc.?
  3. understand that some problems will not have "easy" solutions?
  4. be able to work together in good faith?
  5. trust each other's good intentions?
  6. be willing to compromise?
  7. come up with "best possible" and/or "fairest possible" and/or "least bad" solutions to the most difficult problems?
  8. be eager to transition America from dystopic to neartopic democracy?

(In my view: likely on all counts.)


* * * * * * * * * * * * *


1. What kind of qualities, skill sets, etc. would our voters be looking for in a PKQ-caliber candidate?

Answer: In terms of general skill sets and abilities, the same kind that both the public and private sectors look for if they were recruiting candidates to fill their mid- and upper level executive positions.

Namely, someone:

  • with an excellent formal education,
  • intelligent enough to be able to digest and synthesize large amounts of oft times complex material,
  • with a demonstrated body of general knowledge acquired over decades of meaningful life experience,
  • who has achieved a level of economic and financial success is life,
  • with demonstrated leadership and life-and-death decision making experience.

For determining the candidates' moral/ethical "qualifications" -- a standard background check would suffice, e.g., criminal record, credit score, etc.. Also interviewing friends, neighbors, co-workers, etc.; level of community involvement, amount and kind of volunteerism, charity work, etc.

To determine the candidates' "purity of motive" (POM), our voters will probably agree that, by definition, the POM of anyone who has ever served in political office, or wants to make a career in elected office, will be LOW/ZERO.

Everyone else's POM will be HIGH.

2. Will our voters discover that individuals with these particular skills, abilities, qualities, etc. are extremely rare? Somewhat rare? Not rare at all?

Answer: while an exact number is clearly out of the question, if we conservatively guesstimate a range of as few as 0.5% (one out of two hundred) of America's ~250 million adults, to as many as 5% (one out of twenty), there are between 1.25 -- 12.5 million Americans who qualify as "PKQ-caliber." In raw numbers, even at 0.5% that's a lot of people (almost 2,900 in each of our 435 congressional districts).

That's enough to keep Congress overflowing with a steady supply of highly capable liberal, moderate, conservative, etc. PKQ-caliber legislators for well over ten thousand years* (about 14,000 years to be exact).

* assumes the maximum time served in office for our 100 Senate and 435 House members is six years.

3. How can a Congress controlled by "amateurs" -- i.e., legislators who are not "professional" or career politicians -- run a nation as large and complex as America?

Answer: Because this is probably the most important question, by far, the answer will require three parts.

A1: First, it should be obvious that Congress doesn't "run" America (thank goodness). Our nation is "run" by tens of millions of Americans distributed throughout:

  • dozens of major federal agencies
  • 50 fully functioning state governments
  • thousands of county, city and other government bodies, and
  • millions of:
    • businesses
    • community and social organizations
    • school boards, churches
    • charities, etc.


A2: Next, keeping this nexus in mind (i.e., the true cause of our EFFS misery, AND existential threat to our democracy)...

... it is important that we not forget that PKQ-caliber legislators will be among the most intelligent, most educated -- most knowledgeable -- most accomplished members of our society. And they will be there to "optimize" our dysfunctionalized systems.

They will NOT be, as some might fear, erudite academicians who will rule from high atop Mt. Olympus, divorced from the reality of everyday life; blindly indifferent to the daily plight of the unwashed masses. America's voters, unwashed or otherwise, wouldn't give such people the time of day, much less recruit them to run for our national legislature.

Moreover, PKQ-caliber legislators will have what no other generation before us has had: the sum total of all human knowledge at their fingertips (or, rather, their smartphones). IBM's Watson, Alexa, Siri, and other forms of artificial intelligence will be at their beck and call. Add to that the wealth of "flesh-and-blood" knowledge, experience, wisdom, expertise, etc. that will be at their disposal in our federal agencies, our many think tanks in Washington and around the country, our universities, Silicon Valley, our business sector, etc.

A3: Finally, a sage observation by Ayn Rand is 100% applicable:

"You can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality."

Let's face it, if the collective we, i.e., LOC and ROC Americans, don't solve our PAP-controlled Congress problem, it will be PAP-controlled Congresses -- not the Democrats!! or the Republicans!!, or liberalism!! or conservatism!! -- that ends up destroying our democracy.

It's that simple.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *


PAP-governed democracy: (a.k.a. dystopic democracy)

a democracy whose national legislature stays permanently controlled by PAPs.
PKQ-governed democracy: (a.k.a. neartopic democracy)

a democracy whose national legislature stays permanently controlled by PKQs.


Moving forward, it is critical that our political scientists and other political thinkers, good government activists, social media influencers, etc.

-- who profess to wanting to "make the world a better place" --

begin using and talking about S-G Sci's new terms and concepts, because...

“If you control the language, you control the argument.” George Orwell, 1984


“Change your language and you change your thoughts." Karl Albrecht


It's well worth noting that with just the handful of new terms and concepts you have encountered, our political scientists and other political thinkers/problem solvers in our society -- as well as our middle-, high school and college students -- will be able to begin asking, and answering, entire new categories of questions.

For example:

  • How much of America's extreme:
    • poverty,
    • income inequality,
    • social discontent,
    • racial strife,
    • rich vs. poor animus,
    • political/ideological tribalism,
    • etc.

...exists because America is a PAP-governed democracy?

  • How will America's "democratic process" change when the vast mainstream of voters stop viewing the solutions to America's myriad of EFFS problems in Democrat vs. Republican and/or liberal vs. conservative terms, and begin viewing them in PAP-controlled vs. PKQ-controlled Congress terms?

  • What kind of macro- and micro-social and other changes would we expect to see occur, especially among our younger generations -- and how quickly would they occur -- if America's 535 national legislative role models were no longer pontificating, finger pointing, etc. PAPs constantly demeaning the other side's values, principles, motives, etc. -- but were PKQ-caliber legislators?

  • What kind of legislative policies could (and would) a PKQ-controlled Congress craft and implement that a PAP-controlled Congress couldn't?

How many of those policies would be overwhelmingly supported by voters from across the political/ideological spectrum? (Hint: all of them.)

How many of those policies would actually solve the EFFS problems they were enacted to solve? (Hint: all of them.)

  • What is the likelihood that PKQ-controlled Congresses will result in America's "Imperial Presidency" going the way of the dinosaurs.

    (Hint: 100% likely)

  • TRUE or FALSE: as a society, we are profoundly more:

    rude... crude... loud... greedy... envious... dishonest... angry... resentful... confrontational... judgmental... self righteous... anti-social... etc., etc....

...and profoundly less:

thoughtful... conscientious... respectful... principled... courteous... peaceful... generous... civil... altruistic... resourceful... self-reliant... stoic... goal oriented... civic-minded... community focused... etc., etc....

...than we would otherwise be because we are a PAP-governed democracy.

FYI: which means we will be profoundly LESS:

rude... crude... loud... greedy... envious... dishonest... angry... resentful... confrontational... judgmental... self righteous... anti-social... etc., etc....

...and profoundly MORE:

thoughtful... conscientious... respectful... principled... courteous... peaceful... generous... civil... altruistic... resourceful... self-reliant... stoic... goal oriented... civic-minded... community focused... etc., etc....

when we transition to PKQ-governed democracy.

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

"Power is such a dangerous thing that ideally it should be wielded by people who don't want to use power, who would rather be doing something else, but who are willing to serve a certain number of years as a one-time duty, preferably at the end of a career doing something else." Thomas Sowell [boldface & underline added]

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

re Political Ambition

There are roughly half a million Americans serving in some form of elected office, most of them at the local level. A useful operating assumption is that, not all of them but the vast majority initially ran for office, not because they had political aspirations or they craved political power, but because they constitute that tiny minority of individuals in every democratic society who actually get off their butts and offer to perform what are often times the largely thankless tasks that have to be performed to insure that the many gears of a community (and a society) that are essential to their successful functioning don't stop turning.

(Because when enough gears stop turning, civilizations stop being "civilized.")

That said, within this group of well-meaning, well-intentioned individuals, there is no doubt a small(?)/ substantial(?) percentage who, once in office, experience the perks and privileges that came with their position. And however small or minor those perks may be, they are enough to turn the elected official into, by definition, a "self-serving politician." Meaning, their desire to get re-elected will corrupt their decision making -- perhaps ever so slightly in some cases, considerably in others.

Regardless of how much, it's likely that a significant number of these elected officials will get re-elected simply because they run unopposed -- because no one else wants the job.

The reason for pointing out this commonsense observation about human nature is to underscore the larger takeaway:

Political ambition should be seen as a necessary evil at the local and, to a lesser extent, state level -- but a 100% unnecessary evil at the national legislative level.

* * * * * * * * * *



"If you want something you've never had, you must be willing to do something you've never done."Unknown


In summation...

The nexus between political science's "18th century" understanding of S-G and American democracy's "inevitable" collapse.

Bloodless War Theory

Bloodless War Model
(2-Phase NLEP)



Our LOC and ROC voter's S-G problem...


Our political scientist's "new knowledge" problem and solution...


"Although no one can go back and make
a brand new beginning, anyone can start now
and make a brand new ending"

What our political scientists (our civics educators, too) should be working on with a Manhattan Project sense of urgency...




Name: Montie Rainey

Advocate of Self-Governance Science

Education: BS, Mathematics and Computer Science
(University of Illinois at Chicago, 1984)

Opinion columnist, The Jackson Sun



© Copyright 2021 535PKQs.com. All Rights Reserved.