Dreaming of Consentistan
Introducing My Entry to Max Borders' Quixotic Competition to Write a Constitution of Genuine Consent
On Sunday night, I submitted my entry to the Constitution of Consent competition spearheaded by Max Borders of Underthrow. It's a very strange and fascinating project.
To see why, consider that (a) Americans love to celebrate the Declaration of Independence, which grandly proclaims that…
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
… yet (b) very few of us, immigrants apart, ever actually consented to be ruled by the American government. We were just born here, then from the beginning, the government bossed us around and took our money. It also helps us in a lot of ways. But it never asks our leave for any of it.
The US government, and those of other democracies, do let the populace collectively have a say through elections. Defenders of the system will typically make some desperate attempt to spin this fact into an argument for why yes, we actually do consent, and the principles of the Declaration of Independence by which we justified our rebellion against Great Britain are satisfied by the governmental regime that we established in its place. That's not an easy argument to even pretend to make. At one level, elections seem completely irrelevant to consent. If the government is bossing me around in some way that I don't like, how does it help if, after maybe waiting two or four years, I can vote for or against a handful of politicians and ballot issues, which as likely as not have nothing to do with my objections to the government's behavior? And anyway, the odds of my vote changing any outcome of the election are infinitesimal. The one bit of truth in this obfuscatory balderdash is that if lots of people have the same objection to the government's conduct, politicians eager to keep their jobs will often listen. That helps a little, but hardly more than if an absolutist monarch has a practice of regularly hearing citizen petitions and occasionally acting on them. Democracy has many virtues, but consent of the governed it ain't.
The other thing people sometimes say if you complain that you didn't consent to the rule of the US government, is that if you don't like it, you can leave. There are two gargantuan problems with this very silly argument. First, why should the government have a right to banish you from the place that you have made yours through all sorts of labor and community ties and habitual use, if you don't like its rule? Consent of the governed has to mean, if it's not a travesty, that you can stay put and keep enjoying your natural rights and also refuse your consent to the ruler.
Second, can we really leave? Exit is a much less practical option today that it has been at almost any time in the past. In the late 19th century, people were wiser and better than we are today, and everyone who was anyone understood pretty clearly a truth that is really pretty obvious, but which almost everyone alive today has joined a conspiracy to be blind to, namely, that if you want to migrate and move somewhere else and live by your labor peacefully and trade with others, that's no one's business, and governments can't justly stop you, especially if you're driven to migrate by desperate need. Imagine a world in which Hitler won World War II, and the Nazis brainwashed everybody, and we all talked as if of course Aryans were the master race and the Jews had to be exterminated and Hitler is a god and German conquest is righteous and it's a better world not having democracy and living in fear of the SS, etc., and most of us kind of thought so,v having heard nothing else, though some had secret misgivings. Well, that's kind of the world we live in, except that the evil ideas that have triumphed and brainwashed everyone are immigration restrictionist rather than Nazi. As a result, where emigration was almost always a practical option for most people throughout the modern era, today most people probably couldn't move to a foreign country if they tried. They'd need permission, and it's very hard to get it. And people who lazily say that you consent to the government by living here virtually never have the slightest interest in doing anything to solve that problem. Consensual government would be very imperfect if (a) the only alternative to consent were emigration, but (b) civilized countries really did collaborate to make good and certain that everyone had a lot of appealing emigration options available to them. As it is, you just have to shake your head in despair at people's ignorance when people make this argument.
A far more sensible response, if the US government's legitimacy is challenged on the basis of its lacking the consent of the governed, is to say that governmental legitimacy doesn't require consent of the governed, because it's totally infeasible to establish governments on real, robust consent, so since we need government, we need to legitimize it in some other way. And yet what would that way be? Why do we regard some rulers as rightful and others as usurpers? If the Proud Boys stormtroopers seized DC and smashed up the whole apparatus and started grind our faces in the dirt unless we burn incense to the divine image of the great defiler, what would actually be wrong with that? Does might make right? If not, what principles can you offer other than consent of the governed to discriminate between tyranny and justice? Is there actually any firm foothold, any coherent political philosophy, between Thrasymchus-Hobbes-Nietzsche and Locke-Jefferson-Thoreau? I've never heard of one.
So that throws me back on the attempt to figure out how government based on the consent of the governed could really be implemented. And anyway, if you see a principle that everyone says they believe in, but no one actually lives by, it's interesting to think about what the world would be like if people actually did live by it. And so Max wanted to see what genuinely consensual constitutions people could come up with, and if there's a $25,000 prize on the table for the best answer.
If you want to read my full length, most thorough thoughts about that, read my 2010 book Principles of a Free Society. I've never heard convincing counter-arguments to it. In fact, I've never heard any counter-arguments to it. It didn't make enough of a splash, even in, let alone outside, libertarian circles to provoke any cogent criticism. And so I declared victory, or gave up, or whatever. I had hoped to learn from what I might provoke people to say, but if people couldn't be bothered, then I'd better get on with my life. My views on politics today are kind of second-hand, dog-eared copy of Principles of a Free Society with lots of notes scribbled in the margins. Lest I complain too much, however, I think Principles of a Free Society had some intellectual paternity of the blog Open Borders: The Case, which in its heyday was a feast of collaborative inquiry. But it was a one-issue discussion, a most important issue to be sure, but not really capable, ultimately, of coherent discussion as a standalone topic because the arguments for and against depend on premises that lie outside the topic itself. In that sense, Principles of a Free Society is a more satisfactory intellectual product than Open Borders: The Case, because it does plumb the deep questions, or tries to. If I were to write Principles of a Free Society today, it would turn out quite differently, but as far as I know, the new version would be consistent with the old one. I'm not aware of having changed my mind about anything major, though I could be wrong. That's the backstory of my response to Max Borders' challenge.
Bear in mind that this was written in ridiculous haste. The contest was open from July 15th to October 15th, but I didn't find out about it until Friday, October 13th. And I had a full weekend of fun family activities. This was a composition of late nights and speech-to-text while doing chores and driving. I don't really expect to win. I don't think I've really solved the constitutional Rubik's cube that Max created. And I wouldn't exactly want to, because I don't subscribe to all the same principles or accept all the same desiderata. But when someone is doing something as interesting and ambitious as this, I like to support them. And I'm grateful to Max for stirring up my old libertarian idealism again. It can get too lonely to sustain, but it's so honest and authentic and righteous and fun!
One thing that I think will surprise, trouble, and perhaps shock the contest judges is the rather neofeudal flavor of my offering. It's full of knights and nobles and guilds. Even if these concepts can be adapted into a defensible form, why use such off-putting language? I actually think that a huge dose of passionate philo-medievalism is indispensable if we're ever going to rise above the wicked and stultifying cul-de-sac into which we have fallen. The medievals had their faults and we have ours, and they're not the same, so while they're a cautionary tale in some respects, it's long past time to stop taking the mote out of the medievals' eye and start taking the beam out of our own. And the medievals can help us do that. The medievals are so different, yet at the same time, so familiar, and for that reason a serious engagement with the Middle Ages is by far the most efficient way to open one's minds to new ideas. The very word "knight," like a magic spell, creates in the mind, in a moment, the glorious ideal of a man having adventures and using violence for the sake of justice, accountable to his own conscience and desirous of honor among his peers rather than being accountable to the state, more effectively than a pile of densely-worded philosophical tomes about polycentric police accountability could ever do.
Once upon a time, the humanists of the Italian Renaissance launched a rebellion of the mind against the decadent late Middle Ages in which they lived, taking the ancient world as their model, and they imaginatively reformed themselves to such an extent that they became like Greek philosophers and Roman statesmen come back from the dead after fifteen hundred years. They set in motion a brilliant counterpoint of ancient versus “modern,” which at first meant decadence of the Middle Ages, in which framework the vast creativity of modern Europe played out, and created Western civilization as we know it. I think we need the same sort of remedy for our malaise. The past, and God, are the only things strong enough to stand up to the tyranny of the present. There’s not much hope of a better world until either there's a great renewal of the faith, or many men come to see themselves as knights in blue jeans, strangely exiled into a world cluttered with bureaucracy and moral relativism, but determined to tilt at windmills rather than surrender to the drab lies of modernity. Or better yet, both.
So let me tilt at windmills with this fantasy constitution for a republic based on genuine consent. Nothing could seem more impractical, and yet one could conceive a sequence of events where, say, desperate refugees from Gaza create a republic online, and France. Let them have the empty Kerguelen Islands to try their experiment. I have a notion that if the Age of Giant Airships ever gets over an initial investment hump, it might twist the kaleidoscope of human geography as much as the Age of Sail did long ago, and fantasy constitutions like this might become as practical as the one that a clique of aristocratic dreamers penned and sit on its way in 1789. Then again, there's a more immediate technological path to utopia in low Earth orbit satellite and telework. If you want to form a republic on new principles on a tropical island, you might not have to give up your job, just Zoom from Treasure Island.
Without further ado, here's a proposed constitution for the government of Consentistan. See what you think! Feedback welcome!
We the people of _____, finding ourselves so situated that no existing polity could supply our need for order and community and at the same time respect our basic rights and those of others, hereby institute a new polity, based more thoroughly on the off cited yet rarely if ever honored principle that just government rules but the consent of the governed. We will welcome all seekers of freedom.
The republic established by this constitution shall be an agency comprised of citizens who confer authority on it through their consent. Their promises to one another give it the right to direct them in specific, limited ways, in the interests of their common peace, prosperity, and freedom.
Citizenship
This section defines citizens: who they are and how they are made citizens; the oath taken by them; who may become a citizen; what citizens are obliged to do; what rights citizens have; and how citizenship may be lost.
The Citizen Oath
Citizens are created through their own positive consent, indicated through the taking of a Citizen Oath by persons enjoying the right or being granted the opportunity to become citizens. No person who has not taken the Citizen Oath shall be a citizen.
The Citizen Oath shall include a promise to
fulfill the duties of citizens under this basic law, and
give alms, when prosperous, to citizens who are destitute, provided that they are willing to work and their poverty is no fault of their own.
In return, the republic will promise its protection of the citizen's natural rights, on the principle of "all for one and one for all."
Citizen Oath Version Control
The text of the Citizen Oath shall be the prerogative of the Assembly to define.
In the event of alteration of the Citizen Oath, the republic shall be cognizant of the fact that there are differences among citizens in the oath that they have taken, and therefore in the obligations that they owe to the republic. Citizens who took an older version of the oath shall not be held to the obligations entailed by a new version of the oath.
Citizens who took an old version of the oath, but who wish to update their oath to align with changes in the text, shall have the right to be released from their former oath and take the new oath instead, without jeopardizing their status as citizens.
No Private Vengeance
Above all, the text of the oath must always make clear that while citizens shall enjoy the right to self-defense in the face of immediate danger, but they shall voluntarily relinquish the right violently to avenge wrongs against themselves.
Instead, if they need redress of wrongs, they shall appeal to Judges, Knights, and/or the Assembly to act on their behalf.
Citizenship Ceremonies and Objection Handling
The taking of the Citizen Oath and the creation of a new citizen shall be a public ceremony, presided over by a Gatekeeper, who shall stand as the representative of the republic. If possible, the ceremony shall be conducted in a publicly accessible physical location. If a physical presence ceremony is not feasible, an online ceremony shall be conducted. The ceremony shall provide an opportunity for other citizens to raise objections to the republic’s acceptance of the candidate as a citizen. In the case of objections, the Gatekeeper shall have discretion whether to complete or postpone the ceremony.
In general, it shall be a valid objection to the creation of a citizen if it is shown that the candidate for citizenship has, in the past, strongly advocated views on topics such as ethics and governmental authority that are clearly inconsistent with the laws and principles of the republic. In particular, no one shall be admitted to citizenship who has advocated (a) genocide, (b) tyranny, (c) slavery, (d) mass expulsion or deportation of peaceful immigrants, or (e) violations of religious freedom, unless the candidate citizen explicitly and strongly repudiates his or her former views.
Citizen Registry
The republic shall attempt to maintain a registry of all persons who have taken the Citizen Oath and participate in the rights and duties of citizens of the republic. However, citizen status shall depend upon having taken the Oath, and not on the presence of one's name in the citizen registry.
The Maturity Requirement for Citizenship and the Treatment of Children
Because consent is required for citizenship, full citizenship is not possible for those who have not attained the age of consent. Children may be referred to as citizens to honor their parents, and may be treated as citizens for some international law purposes, but they shall not have the full rights and duties of citizens. The age of consent is at least 16, and no more than 25, and may be defined by the Assembly or by Gatekeepers on a case by case basis.
Children under the age of consent whose parents are citizens, or who reside on a territory where the republic has jurisdiction and have no other citizenship, will enjoy the republic's protection of their natural rights on an equal basis with citizens, either as a right of their parents, in the case of children of citizens, or out of mercy and the principle of hospitality, in the case of others.
Birthright Citizenship
The right to become a citizen upon reaching maturity and taking the Citizen Oath shall be enjoyed by all persons who (a) are born to at least one parent who is a citizen of the republic, or (b) are born on any territory where the republic has jurisdiction.
Right to a Pathway to Citizenship
Persons neither born to citizen parents nor born on a territory where the republic has jurisdiction, but whose parents became citizens, or who became resident on the republic’s territory, while they were children under the age of 18, shall enjoy a right to a pathway to citizenship that is practically feasible for the majority of such persons. The pathway to citizenship, however, may involve additional requirements not applicable to birthright citizen candidates, such as thresholds for educational attainment, labor force participation, and/or track records of compliance with laws.
Pathways to citizenship may be defined by the Assembly for practical application by the Gatekeepers. Gatekeepers may exercise discretion when the Assembly has been silent, or when the legally defined pathways are too restrictive and fail to comply with the constitutional requirement of practical feasibility for the majority, so that justice requires the admission to citizenship of someone whom the Assembly's prescriptions would unjustly and unconstitutionally exclude.
Other Naturalizations
Persons who immigrate as adults may be regarded as enjoying a right to citizenship on the basis of long residency, habituation to the ways of the republic, and integration into the community. Gatekeepers may determine when this condition applies. The Assembly may issue guidance which Gatekeepers should take into account. In other cases, persons with notable skills or virtues may be admitted to citizenship not as a matter of human rights but for the benefit of the society and economy of the republic.
Dual Citizenship
Notwithstanding any other clause of this basic law, no person who has citizenship in another polity, and is unwilling to relinquish it, shall be regarded as having a right to citizenship in the republic, even if he or she is willing to take the Citizen Oath.
In cases where a citizen of another polity wishes to become a citizen of the republic and have dual citizenship, Gatekeepers shall determine whether it is in the interests of the republic to allow this.
Non-Citizen Residents
The republic shall not exclude non-citizens from its territory unless they constitute a clear and urgent danger to public safety. Private citizens shall have a right to practice hospitality to foreign persons on privately owned land in the republic's jurisdiction without the consent of the republic. Non-citizens shall also have a right to traverse the public streets.
Resident non-citizens will be spared the burden of obeying the positive laws of the republic to the extent possible. They may, however, be required to pay taxes.
Deprivation of Citizenship Due to Radically Subversive Speech
Because citizenship is based on consent to the republic’s laws and principles, forms of speech radically subversive of those laws and principles may in some cases result in deprivation of citizenship. In particular, citizens shall not advocate (a) genocide, (b) the overthrow of the republic’s consensual form of government and the establishment of tyranny in its place, (c) forcible reduction of free persons to slavery, (d) the deportation or expulsion of peaceful non-citizen residents from the republic’s territory, or (e) abrogations of religious freedom.
Gatekeepers shall monitor the speech and discourse of the citizenry and alert the Assembly if they believe that citizens are engaging in speech incompatible with the republic’s principles. In such cases, education and correction shall be the first recourse, but in cases of prominent and stubborn advocacy of principles and views inimical to the republic, the Assembly may require a public recantation, and strip the offender of citizenship if it is not forthcoming. Loss of citizenship will cause a former citizen to become a non-citizen resident, but may be reversed after five years if the former citizen recants the objectionable views.
Voluntary Relinquishing of Citizenship
Any citizen may relinquish their citizenship and be released from their Citizen Oath at any time. The intent to relinquish citizenship shall be communicated to a Gatekeeper, who shall deal with the citizen as the representative of the republic. Citizens who relinquish citizenship may require character witnesses if they want to renew their citizenship, to prevent instability and opportunism.
II. Duties of Citizens
Taxes
The republic may assess taxes on sales, property, income, capital gains, and inheritance, as well as excise taxes on specific commodities. No tax rate shall exceed 10%. Property tax rates shall not exceed 1% of the real market value of property. Tax rates may be increased only by popular vote and with a ⅔ majority. Tax rates may be reduced by an act of the Assembly or by a popular vote with a simple majority.
Income taxes may not be levied on non-citizen residents. Property tax rates, however, can be higher on non-citizen residents than on citizens.
Military service and conscription
When hostile forces invade territory over which the republic has jurisdiction, the republic may conscript citizens into the armed forces to defend it. When the republic foresees a likelihood that it will be invaded, the republic may require citizens to purchase arms and engage in military drill and combat training in order to be prepared.
Jury Duty
The republic may require citizens to serve on juries to determine the guilt or innocence of citizens accused of crimes.
Legislative Duty to Assist the Assembly
In rare cases, the Assembly may feel the need for additional authority and insight in order to settle controversial questions and establish necessary laws and determinations. In such cases, it may conscript citizens to temporary legislative duty for up to three months at a time. These citizen legislators will be chosen by lot, with equal probability, from the whole body of the citizenry. Barring exigent circumstances, they shall be required to participate in the deliberations of the Assembly and vote on selected resolutions and laws.
Conscripted citizen legislators will vote by secret ballot and their votes cannot be made public, except by any statements they may voluntarily make themselves. Each conscript citizen legislator’s vote will have the same way as an elected legislator.
Loans to the Republic in Time of Emergency
In times of emergency, the republic may require citizens to make loans, according to their means, to the public treasury.
Obedience to Positive Law
Citizens shall undertake to adhere to the laws passed by the republic insofar as conscience permits.
III. Rights of Citizens
Natural Law Rights
Many rights enjoyed by citizens arise from natural law, including bodily autonomy, property rights, freedom of association, the right to use the public streets, and free speech. The republic will protect these rights of citizens, with the caveat that some speech acts, though they will not be persecuted or repressed, may result in loss of citizenship.
Right to Privacy
Citizens shall have a general right to non-interference by the republic in their private affairs, and to the secrecy of such information as may come into the republic's possession through tax administration, criminal investigation, and other public functions. Additionally, the physical space of citizens' homes shall be sacrosanct against unwanted intrusion, for the protection of decency. Citizens who are not members of the enumerated distinguished classes may be entitled to claim damages if the unnecessary public disclosure of their private information by fellow citizens harms that economic interests.
Freedom of Conscience
Since the republic is based on promises comprising a social contract, and since ethical contradictions are created if people promise to do what they believe is morally forbidden or promise not to do what they believe is morally required, it is essential to the legitimacy and integrity of the republic that it never require citizens to violate the demands of conscience by doing what is wrong or refraining from doing what is right. The republic must yield to sincere conscientious objections to its laws.
Right to Beg Alms
A citizen faced with dire poverty has the right to beg alms of fellow citizens. Rights of privacy and regulation of public streets shall not be defined in administered in a manner that renders begging infeasible. Citizens who find a beggar to be a nuisance may report him or her to the Gatekeepers' Guild, which shall try to find a public works job with a subsistence wage. A citizen who is repeatedly reported as a nuisance neither beggar, and who repeatedly refuses remunerative work, may be deprived of full citizenship and voting rights.
Voting
Decision making in the republic will frequently involve voting by the citizenry, either directly on policy decisions, or else in the election of representatives who will make the decisions. Every citizen shall have a right to vote in all elections, and to choose either a secret ballot or a public ballot.
Running for the Assembly
Citizens shall have the right to offer to represent their fellow citizens in the Assembly, and have the opportunity to receive their votes.
Local Government
Citizens shall have the right to organize local governments to manage local common property resources in a consensual and democratic way. A petition to organize a new local government must define a geographically contiguous territory, largely inclusive of all habitual users of the common property resources that it contains. If the petition receives 100 signatures, a referendum will be held, with voting by all residents of the proposed territory. If it wins a ⅔ majority of the votes in favor of organizing, the new local government will be established.
The Assembly can intervene if there is evidence of gerrymandering and deliberate, unfair exclusion of identifiable groups of habitual users of common property resources, but improprieties aside, the organization of local governments shall be understood and treated as a citizen right, and not a privilege granted by the Assembly on a discretionary basis.
As discussed below, a referendum to organize a new local government can also be called by a resident Noble.
IV. Territorial Jurisdiction
This basic law is designed to work with or without a territory over which the republic enjoys sovereign jurisdiction, though some parts of it cannot be operable unless the republic has some territorial jurisdiction. Refugees, for example, might seek to establish a republic for mutual defense even if it is not feasible for them to establish a place where they have a durable right to live.
It is also not the intent of the basic law to enable the republic to contest the sovereign jurisdiction of any territory against any existing state.
There are nonetheless cases where territorial jurisdiction might emerge. For example, people with a historic claim to a territory may seek to organize themselves into a republic based on this constitution. Or an established sovereign state might choose to alienate some of its territory to a republic organized along these lines.
If a group of citizens wants to secede from the republic and establish a new republic with jurisdiction over parts of the republic’s territory that they own or habitually use, the Assembly shall study landownership and land use patterns in the candidate secession area, and make a determination of whether the secession serves the general interest.
V. Distinguished Classes
Several distinguished classes shall exist in the republic, with special purposes, rights, duties, and virtues to be expected or cultivated. The distinguished classes are
Knights
Judges
Gatekeepers
Nobles
Clerics
Teachers
Each distinguished class will have criteria for entry; distinctive oaths taken; a guild to oversee its work, refine its professionalism, and capture and socialize its knowledge; and peculiar rights and duties.
All citizens may achieve membership of any of the distinguished classes, given the right talents, traits of character, and circumstances. Citizen nomination in connection with a required service, followed by an opportunity for public objections, and then an oath-taking ceremony, is one path of entry to each of the distinguished classes. Membership of a distinguished class shall not be hereditary.
Oaths taken as part of entry into distinguished classes shall be crafted by the respective guilds of each class, to induct new entrants to these professions into the values and goals peculiar to each class. The oaths shall not exceed 500 words, in order to keep them readable by the public for more effective accountability. Violation of oaths shall be grounds for expulsion from each of the professions, either by the guild or by the Assembly.
Members of distinguished classes shall forfeit some of the rights of privacy, which other citizens may expect, as needed to assess their character and hold them accountable for fulfilling their oaths. Citizens are encouraged gossip about members of distinguished classes, and will not be held liable for damages if rumors and public opinion cause them inconvenience.
Knights
Citizens who need physical protection should turn to Knights. Unlike other citizens, Knights may avenge wrongs done both to themselves and others. They will be accountable to Judges, to the Assembly, and to other Knights for violent actions that fall short of just conduct, but their peculiar responsibility to protect the public safety shall be taken into account.
If citizens who need protection are not satisfied with the Knights whose services are available, they may nominate new Knights. Such nominations must be accompanied by the nominating citizens’ attestations of the candidate Knight’s virtues. Knights should be distinguished by justice, restraint, courageous character and combat prowess. Candidacies for knighthood should be published for a reasonable time, and any objections heard, before a knighthood ceremony is conducted.
A Knightly Oath should be taken that commits them to defend justice and protect the weak and helpless. Knights’ first accountability is to their own consciences and the oaths they have taken, but they are encouraged to pursue quests set by the Assembly insofar as conscience permits.
The Knights’ Guild will develop, refine, and regularly publish a Knightly Code that all Knights are expected to live by, with a focus on mercy and prevention of unjust violence and abuse of power. The Guild may expel unworthy members. Knights can receive payment from citizens in return for protection.
Judges
Citizens who need help establishing contracts or settling disputes should turn to Judges. In general, it is the responsibility of contracting parties to research available Judges and then include an arbitration clause identifying the Judge who will arbitrate if there is a dispute. While the Assembly may intervene to help deal with contract disputes when the contracting parties have failed to identify an arbitrator, it does not promise to do this, and contracts with no arbitrators may fail to be enforced.
When citizens wishing to form contracts are not satisfied with the available Judges, they may nominate new ones. New candidate Judges shall be of just character and erudite in matters of law. The Judges’ Guild may also train and appoint new Judges. All new Judges shall take a Judicial Oath that commits them to strive to discern the right, recuse themselves when they have conflicts of interest, and take no secret bribes to decide a case in a particular way, although they can be paid in advance to serve as arbitrators rather than for a specific judgment. Judges are encouraged to compete for arbitration business. Additionally, judges may contract with other judges to serve as courts of appeal, potentially through multiple tiers, giving rise to judicial systems. Both the Judges’ Guild and the Assembly should study the performance of judges and judicial systems and provide information to the citizenry so that they can make informed decisions about where to turn for effective and discerning justice.
Citizens who are victims of crimes are advised not only to engage Knights to redress wrongs, but also to consult Judges for insight about whether evidentiary standards have been met and what kind and degree of retribution is appropriate. Failure to do this may result in victims of crime facing punishment themselves for excessive or misdirected vengeance that comprises a fresh crime.
The Judges’ Guild will annually update the Judicial Oath, and compile and publish a summary of the laws, customs, procedures and protocols of the republic for the information of the judicial profession, the Assembly, and the citizenry.
Gatekeepers
Gatekeepers, whose functions have been discussed above in connection with citizenship, are created in every election, because every current and former member of the Assembly is inducted into the class of Gatekeepers. Citizens can appoint additional Gatekeepers if they are needed to handle the volume of citizenship ceremonies that are needed. The Gatekeepers’ Guild will coordinate naturalization practices and report to the Assembly on the demographics and attitudes of new citizens, as well as any threats to the social contract that they perceive.
Gatekeepers and members of the Assembly shall be the only public officials paid directly from the treasury of the republic.
Nobles
The Assembly shall honor citizens for distinguished services to the Republic, exemplary character, wealth, and/or general eminence and admiration by offering them the rank of Noble. Nobles will be entitled to vote in the Assembly and exempt from property taxes, but they shall incur obligations of public service in return, and forfeit most of the rights of privacy enjoyed by other citizens. The Assembly may demand full disclosure of their personal finances at any time, as well as copies of all their correspondents. Nobles shall be required to assume high public office at the request of the Assembly, in a manner to be defined by the nobles guild, but including at a minimum, a willingness to serve as president and head of state when required.
The votes of Nobles in the Assembly exercised by virtue of the rank, as distinct from votes exercised by virtue of election, shall comprise no more than one. Third of the total votes. The Nobles guild shall advise the Assembly on how to score the votes of Nobles when the number of Nobles present would result in a more than one third waiting of their votes.
Nobles shall also have the prerogative to found local governments in areas where they reside, with the support of a 2/3 of majority of the residents, but without the need to collect citizen petitions. Local government constitutions initiated by a noble may provide for lifelong office for the founder, but if they continue beyond that term, must thereafter be democratically governed on the basis of equal representation for the residents.
Nobles whose principles and manner of life are not fitting for their rank may be deprived of it by a 2/3 vote of the Assembly, or by a simple majority of the Assembly followed by a simple majority in a popular referendum.
Clerics
Ministers of the Gospel and other moral and spiritual leaders may be identified as clerics and asked to participate in a Clerics' Guild by the citizenry or the Assembly. The Clerics' Guild shall consult as needed on questions of freedom of conscience, as well as questions of mendicancy and vagrancy. Clerics may not bear arms or hold public office, but claim tax exemption for the institutions they run.
Teachers
Five or more citizens may nominate as Teachers any citizens they regard as unusually knowledgeable or skillful in teaching. Teachers may accept the nomination by taking an Oath, developed and refined by the Teachers’ Guild under the oversight of the Assembly, by which they promise to teach diligently if hired to educate young people, to teach truth and combat error, and to inculcate in their students morals and principles that contribute to the health of the republic.
The republic shall provide education vouchers to parents for all children between the ages of 6 and 16, to ensure that they can be properly educated. Teachers shall be able to receive these vouchers from parents in return for educational labor. The Teachers’ Guild shall share information and best practices and report to the Assembly on the education of the young.
Guilds
Guilds shall generally be self-governing and elect their own officers. However, the Assembly can intervene in their affairs when the public interest urgently requires it, and it may impose requirements on guilds' governance and removal of specific officers in return for approving annual public funding.
In general, it shall be the responsibility of the official class guilds to include and represent all persons who are employed by citizens to perform the functions of that profession, and who have taken the oath. However, if guild leaders believe that some practicing members of the profession are unfit, they can petition the Assembly to exclude them, or exclude them pending an appeal to the Assembly. The Assembly shall monitor the balance struck by the guilds between inclusiveness and professionalism.
Guilds shall also be the chief initiators of legislation, focusing on matters touching their areas of practice. A parliamentarian appointed by the Nobles’ guild shall determine whether proposed laws offered by the guilds relate to their areas of practice and shall receive consideration by the Assembly, or are out of their scope and shall be ignored.
VI. The Assembly
While governance in the republic shall be primarily the work of the distinguished classes and their guilds, there shall also be an Assembly, popularly elected, to oversee the guilds and told them accountable for their service to the public interest, while managing public funds. Some of the rights and duties of the Assembly have been discussed above, but the complete discussion is here. The Assembly shall:
Meet once a year, in a session of sufficient length to conduct necessary business, and then adjourn;
Vote whether to elect a president who can represent it in its absence, and if so, select one;
Compile an annual budget;
Organize tax rate referenda as needed;
Organized referenda on other general laws indispensable to the health of the constitution;
Vote on general laws initiated by the guilds or popular petitions, as well as renewals of existing laws that have expired;
Oversee the guilds and their members to ensure that their conduct is consistent with the laws and principles of the republic, as well as with the oaths they have taken;
Review judicial practices and advise citizens on where to seek justice;
Review and advise on gatekeeping and naturalization practices;
Ennoble individuals of exceptional merit;
Disennoble Nobles whose conduct, character and principles are unworthy of their rank.
Members of the Assembly shall not have the right to initiate legislation.
The Assembly shall divide the citizenry and/or the territory of the republic, for purposes of voting, into groups, based on affinity and/or geographic contiguity to the extent possible, but above all with well-defined and numerically equal membership, to ensure equal representation and definitive election outcomes. The number of members of the Assembly shall be twice the number of voter groupings. Electoral procedures shall be defined to ensure that there is at least one representative from each grouping, while allocating the rest of the seats to the candidates who get the most votes. Candidates who anticipate that they will receive more votes than they need to win Assembly seats may define a list of alternates who can inherit the votes that they do not need. Alternates will be listed on the ballot after the candidate's name. Citizens can vote for as many candidates as they wish, in rank order of preference. Voter candidate lists will be evaluated in random order, and votes assigned to each voter's highest ranking candidate still in need of votes to win a seat. Citizens may elect either a secret ballot or a public ballot. If they choose a public ballot and none of their preferred candidates win, their votes will receive double weight in the subsequent election. To prevent partisanship, candidates may not list a partisan identification on the ballot.
Members of the Assembly shall vow to vote in the public interest and not for the benefit of a party or faction. Any member who believes that another member is motivated by partisan or factional bias may state this accusation and call for a vote to expel the partisan member. The vote will then be taken by secret ballot, and at 2/3 majority shall suffice for expulsion.
Initially, the Assembly shall be constituted in any way that founding circumstances render convenient, but over time, its representative character will be assured through annual elections. For the sake of continuity, members will not all vacate at the same time, but rather, 1/5 of members, chosen by lot, will be unseated each year, and their seats filled through election. If there is an outstanding public debt, the share unseated will increase to ⅓. If the outstanding public debt has increased in a given year, the share unseated will increase to ½. Assembly members who are unseated during a deficit year will be ineligible to run for office again for 10 years.