Civil Individualism Overview Oct 2009

Civil IndividualismA Modern Political Philosophy of Checks and Balances

04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 1

Civil Individualism: A Definition

Civil Individualism is a political philosophy which holds first that sovereignty is

rooted in each equal individual. Second, that, as individuals, we must collectively create institutions in order to secure our freedoms, and to achieve other mutual benefits that we can not achieve alone.

Lastly, that all of our institutions threaten to harm individuals, and must be governed by systems of checks &

balances.04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 2

Major Types of Institutions Governmental: Federal, State,

Municipal, Trans-National, Agencies, Political Parties.

Military: Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, National Guards, Militias, Mercenaries.

Corporate: Corporations, Companies, LLC’s, Partnerships.

Religious: Churches, Denominations, Mosques, Temples, Cults.

Charitable: Charities, Foundations, Endowments, NGO’s

Educational: Colleges, Universities, Schools, Fraternities, Sororities, Institutes, Think Tanks.

Medical: Hospitals, Clinics, Professional Associations, Research Foundations.

Artistic: Museums, Orchestras, Troupes, Studios, Networks, Television & Radio Stations.

Athletic: Teams, Leagues, Associations, Committees, Boosters, Tournaments, Tours.

Legal: Courts, Law Firms, Professional Associations, Arbitration Societies.

Labor: Unions, Guilds, Trade Associations.

Other: Police & Fire Companies, Chambers of Commerce, Relief Organizations, Country Clubs, Organized Crime, Street Gangs.


Core Tenets

Individuals are sovereign. Institutions exist to amplify individual

efforts. Individuals are imperfect. Institutions magnify individual

imperfections. Institutions have imperfections of

their own. Institutional flaws harm individuals.

We design and implement Checks & Balances to protect ourselves from

institutional dangers.


Sovereignty & Its Implications

Individual sovereignty means that we are all implicitly free to do as we will, provided that we do not interfere with others’ sovereignty.

Individual sovereignty also implies that all institutions are (or were originally) the voluntary creations of individual participants

As the creation of individuals, all institutional authority is implicitly (or explicitly) derived from the consent of individual participants.


The Role of Institutions

Institutions exist solely as a means of coordinating and amplifying individual capabilities to achieve goals that are beyond the capacities of individuals on their own.

For example, governmental, military, and legal institutions allow us to band together to protect ourselves from each other.

Our institutions, no matter how long they have existed or how much they are respected, are simply our tools.


Limits on Institutions

We have an absolute right to change/abolish specific institutions when, as our tools, they no longer meet our needs well.

There is no moral justification for institutions pursuing goals of their own which are independent of their voluntary participants.

We have an obligation to ensure that our institutions do not develop, pursue and/or expand their own agendas.


Institutional Successes

At their best, our institutions harness and direct our energies to achieve truly inspiring goals – from the defeat of the Fascists in WWII, to the success of the Internet itself.

In their many successes, our institutions inspire pride in ourselves and our fellows, and reflect the best of our individual efforts.

Without our institutions, and their successes, our lives would be much poorer, and we ourselves, more isolated and vulnerable.


Institutional Failures

At their worst, our institutions magnify our personal flaws, set us against each other, and seek to expand themselves at the expense of our individual freedoms.

Left unchecked, the abuses of our institutions have been amongst our most shameful, from the initial legality of slavery and the internment camps of WWII, through the Enron & WorldCom frauds, to the pedophile priest scandal.

When we fail to constrain the behavior of our institutions, we put ourselves at great risk.


Government Institutions

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Allied defeat of the Nazi’s

Eradication of Polio Interstate Highway

System Cuban Missile Crisis NASA Apollo Program 60’s Civil Rights

Legislation Fall of Communism Operation Desert

Storm 9/11 Bi-Partisan

Response

ABUSES

Internment of the Japanese

McCarthy-ism & HUAC Military-Industrial

Complex The Bay of Pigs Viet Nam - My Lai Hoover’s FBI “Secret

Files” Watergate Iran-gate Whitewater04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 10

Corporate Institutions

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Microsoft, Apple & the PC

Boeing, USAir & Air Travel

AT&T and Communications

Cisco, Cable & The Internet

The US Standard of Living

Deere & Farm Productivity

Disney & Entertainment

Fidelity & the Mutual Fund

Visa and the Credit Card

ABUSES

Savings & Loan Crisis Enron & WorldCom Love Canal Pollution Mortgage Crisis AIG & Lehman Failures HP Spying Scandal BCCI Scandal Tobacco Industry

Cover-up Halliburton Over-

charges04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 11

Religious Institutions

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Mother Teresa’s Work The Sistine Chapel Vatican Artwork Handel’s Messiah Catholic Charities Jewish Charities Gandhi's Non-Violence Catholic Universities Need Islamic

Example

ABUSES

The Inquisition Priest Pedophilia

Cover-Up Vatican Bank Jimmy Swaggert

Scandal Jim Bakker Scandal Oral Roberts’ Finances Jim Jones & Jonestown Koresh & Branch

Davidians Heaven’s Gate04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 12

Charitable Institutions

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

United Way Habitat for Humanity Feed the Children American Red Cross Salvation Army Shriners’ Hospitals Boy Scouts & Girl

Scouts Metropolitan Museum Smithsonian

Institution

ABUSES

Aramony & United Way

Abramoff & Foundation

Santorum & Fundraising

Red Cross & 9/11 Fraud

Nature Conservancy Fraud

FNMA Charity Lobbying

Bishop Estate Scandal ACORN Need Another

Example


Institutional Authority

In a very real sense, all of those employed by our institutions are our servants and/or our agents. They have no inherent rights to dictate to us, or to govern our behavior.

When we delegate authority to our institutions it is for specific explicit purposes, for example - to protect us from each other.

Delegated authority must never be allowed to be extended to other purposes.


Magnifying Personal Flaws

Institutions concentrate power, which can then be abused in the service of individual members of the institutional hierarchy.

The effects of any personal flaw can be magnified by the application of institutional power and authority.

The most typical personal flaws amplified by our institutions are greed, excessive ambition, incompetence and arrogance.


Institutional Flaws

Institutions have unique flaws of their own. The most important institutional flaws, in terms

of the danger they pose to individuals, are: Obedience to Authority: Taken to an extreme,

individuals obey even highly suspect instructions. Institutional Paranoia: Institutions often use ‘us vs.

them’ thinking to elevate competitors and/or outsiders to the status of enemies.

Lack of Accountability: Institutional decision-making processes mask personal accountability, making abuses and excessive risk-taking “no one’s fault”.


Obedience to Authority

Originally studied and articulated through the famous ‘Milgram experiments’ at Yale University in the 1960’s.

Participants in institutional settings suppress their own judgment in favor of compliance with the instructions that they receive.

Demonstration of how normal moral individuals can, at the behest of institutional authority, participate in great wrongdoing.


Institutional Paranoia

Institutions compete.Competition fosters “Us vs. Them”

thinking.Excessive “Us vs. Them” thinking

can lead to paranoia & the demonization of “enemies”.

Examples: Liberal vs. Conservative hate-mongers. Religious wars. Corporate espionage.04/10/2023 ©2009 Michael J. Thebado 18

Lack of Accountability

Many of our institutional endeavors involve dozens, if not hundreds, of people.

When so many people are involved in a particular error or wrong-doing, it promotes the evasion of responsibility.

For example: “I was only following orders” – Nazi

defense “The auditors signed off on it” – Enron

defense “I was following instructions” – auditors’

defense


The Dangers of Governments

All of our institutions can both magnify our personal flaws, and add flaws of their own.

Governmental institutions are particularly dangerous, for at least three reasons: Government institutions are often our

largest. Government institutions are among our

oldest. We delegate relatively more of our

personal sovereignty to our governments, and some states claim sovereignty of their own right at gunpoint.


The Dangers of Corporations

Next to governments, corporate institutions are usually the next most influential in the lives of the majority of Americans.

Corporations do not have quite the legal, size, or longevity advantages of governments. They do have their own: Corporations are usually relatively

wealthy. Corporations usually have ready legal

resources. Corporations influence governments

greatly.


The Limits of Political Debate Contemporary American political debate tends

to focus on the problems of only the two main types of institutions, governmental & corporate.

This “bi-polar” framework often hinders us from identifying universal patterns & tends to restrict our solutions to only those 2 institutional types.

American political dialogue has become an often bitter struggle between the opposing political parties and their ideological deification and demonization of particular institutions.


Political Parties & Their Biases Democrats generally argue that our problems stem

from corporate and military institutions, but often ignore problems of governmental institutions.

Republicans generally argue that our problems stem from governmental institutions, but usually ignore problems caused by corporate institutions.

Libertarians more consistently argue against governmental abuses, but remain relatively silent on the problems posed by corporate institutions and flawed free market mechanisms and beliefs.

Independents frequently recognize the problems of the major parties themselves, but often cannot effectively organize around a consistent platform.


The Effects of “Tunnel Vision” The American political parties are usually

right when the recognize the flaws of the institutions that they generally oppose, although they often exaggerate those flaws.

The political parties are nearly completely blind to the problems of the institutions that they draw their support from.

The two major parties argue that “their” institutions are the only (or the preferred) solutions to the problems posed by the institutions that they oppose.


The Decline of American Politics

Our political debates have become an institutional struggle for supremacy.

Dialogue has been replaced by incendiary invective issued by ideological fanatics.

Some of the public has enlisted in the “war”.

The rest of the public has become either disaffected or fearful, or both.

Bitterness and frustration are increasing.

Our problems can seem too large to solve.


Finding a Way Out

Our problems do not stem from one type of institution, or another.

Our solutions do not lie in preferring one type of institution over the others.

Our solution starts with recognizing that all institutions are inherently flawed, and focusing instead on how to implement a more effective system of checks and balances to constrain their excesses and abuses.


One Solution? Civil Individualism Civil Individualism transcends party politics. Civil Individualism does not cater to any

particular institution, or type of institution. Civil Individualism recognizes the strengths &

weaknesses of both individuals & institutions. Civil Individualism preserves maximum

individual freedom to use our strengths Civil Individualism allows for a minimum of

consensual and consciously-created checks and balances needed to constrain our weaknesses.


Focusing on Checks & Balances

America’s Founding Fathers, and our Constitution, consciously embraced the concept of checks and balances to prevent governmental abuses.

Civil Individualism seeks to extend the concept to all types of institutions.

Civil Individualism also aims to formalize and expand the study and implementation of specific types of checks and balances.


Types of Checks and Balances Access: “Sunshine” Laws,

Televised & Open Meetings, Plain Language Laws.

Advocacy: Ombudsmen, Oversight Boards, Unions, Independent Directors.

Transiency: Term Limits, “Sunset” Laws, Limited Charters, Re-Call Provisions.

Honesty: “Whistleblower” Laws, Independent Certification, Truth-in-Advertising.

Incentives: Recognition, Bonuses, Milestone Payments.

Consequences: Punishments, Exclusion, Suspensions, Contract Nullifications, Punitive Damages, Public Censure.

Transparency: “Open Books” Management, Required Disclosures, Freedom of Information Act, Free Press.

Separation of Powers: Veto’s, Confirmations, maker/checker.

Competition: Multiple providers, low barriers to entry, limited information asymmetry.

Accountability: Reducing limitations on liability, sign-off’s, audit trails, public disclosures.

Impartiality: Use of third-party auditors, overseers, and arbitrators.

Oversight: Ombudsmen, Regulators, Civilian Review Boards, Independent Directors


Checks & Balances ≠ Regulations

The phrase “Checks & Balances” is not new-speak for inefficient bureaucratic regulations.

Checks & Balances are instead well-considered alignments of incentives and disincentives with desired outcomes.

For example, neither term limits on politicians, nor time-limited corporate charters are typical regulations, yet both can curb excessive accumulations of power.


More Creative Checks & Balances

ON GOVERNMENTS

Implementing proportional representation.

Outlawing deficit spending.

Implementing line-item vetoes.

ON CORPORATIONS

Reversing the definition of corporations as legal “persons” with all rights.


Civil Individualism & Democrats

SHARED BELIEFS

The Federal Government is not inherently evil.

Regulations can be useful as checks and balances.

The government should not regulate marriage.

The government should support equal opportunity.

Free Speech is a right. Church & State

Separation.

AREAS OF DISAGREEMENT

Governments are not more moral than corporations.

Corporations are not more harmful than governments.

Regulations are not always the best check or balance.

Privatization is not inherently bad.

Health care is not a “right”.

Social Security is broken.


Civil Individualism & Republicans

SHARED BELIEFS

The Federal Government is inefficient & uncontrolled.

A strong effective military is a Federal responsibility.

Government expansions are often not good choices.

Privatization options can be the best alternatives.

American citizens have the right to bear arms.


De-regulation is not always or inherently effective.

Wasteful military spending must be eliminated.

Corporate malfeasance is widespread & dangerous.

The government can not dictate/enforce morality.

Registering gun ownership is a reasonable check.


Civil Individualism & Libertarians

SHARED BELIEFS

Individuals are sovereign.

Government must answer to the individuals it serves.

Government’s best use is to protect us from each other.

The Federal government has extended itself into areas it has no role in.

No laws against “victim-less” consensual activities.


The State is not evil. Practical effectiveness

trumps intellectual purity.

Free markets can act as irrationally and/or illegally as their participants.

Market participants require checks and balances.

Gun registration is a reasonable check.


Civil Individualism in ContextThe graphic on the right depicts Civil Individualism relative to the major American political parties on a spectrum of individual dependence on governmental and other societal institutions.


Civil Individualism’s Advantages

Civil Individualism is a balanced philosophy, concerned with protecting us from each other, and from all of our institutions.

Civil Individualism is a practical philosophy, cooperating with all, and beholden to no institution, interest group, or political party.

Civil Individualism is an informed philosophy, recognizing the inherent weaknesses of both individuals & the institutions we create.


Implementing Civil Individualism

CI is a pragmatic philosophy, committed to improving things from where they are now.

CI embraces an “overlay” implementation strategy, reforming wherever possible and replacing where reform would be ineffective.

CI recognizes the need for gradual and incremental change, provided that it is also prioritized, constant and unremitting.


Moving Forward

Philosophies must become either widely-embraced, or selectively implemented, to begin to become effectively influential.

Civil Individualism currently seeks to enlist volunteer supporters to refine and spread an understanding of the philosophy.

Our immediate near term goals are the formation of a 501(c)3 charitable foundation and the creation of an Internet presence.


Civil Individualism Overview Oct 2009

News & Politics

Transcript of Civil Individualism Overview Oct 2009