The Constitution functions as a triad. Since the top of the triad is the Executive,
the bottom is the People. The sides, which is the Judicial, keep a proper tension
which modulates the relation of the activity of governing between the top and the
bottom. Up to this point, the structure set out conforms to the provisions in the
Constitution. The triad establishes the equilibrium of its form by keeping
constantly in motion, i.e. a government of, by and for the people. As the
Judicial part of the triad performs its interpretive part, it must do so in linguistic
form. The top, through its laws and policies also functions, of necessity, with
abstractions. Both factors introduces the problematics of the Linguistic Turn and
Postmodernism. The focal point of those problematics relates to language. The
application of the interpretive practices to the bottom of the triad is also in the
form of abstractions, which may be the proper way to use language but its
authoritativeness free-floats. The interpretive practices don't sink down to the
concrete nature of the bottom, hence the words leave too much wiggle room.
   Usually, the Linguistic Turn and Postmodernism are conceived as being
de-constructive. True, nevertheless, these disciplines have alerted us to the nature
of language use. They have placed language in its proper place, viz. its non-
corresespondent and its representational nature. There-in lies the problem with
interpretive practices. But, notice, in the first paragraph above, the relation between
the top and the bottom is a tension. Its not just empty words. It's real and the
modulation is between an abstract top and a concrete bottom. Why is the bottom
conceived in concrete fashion and the top is not? Because the bottom includes
every individual and the bottom cannot be conceived as a "melting pot of
individuality". I am real and so are you. So is everyone.The bottom is 'closer' to
number than to an abstraction. A democracy includes everyone. So, why is the
top not considered concrete? Because it uses language and because the
Constitution is completely in language, thereby requiring interpretation. But,
the relation monitored by the Judicial Branch is real and must relate to a
concrete bottom. Interpretive practices have got to become more numeric. We
must construct a bridge between the abstract and the real. Thats the only way
to have a real democracy. It would also help dilute Party politics. 
  
  
.