Political writing is very nebulous. Its never clear because the underlying basis or
foundations are undefined. If it is defined, its defined in a high level abstraction that
has no foundations in anything concrete. In early writings, the underlying basis of
government was the abstract concept of the State. We still use the word "State",
but it's still used as a high level abstraction that has no foundation. Rousseau
called it a "persona ficta because not a man". Once the concept is established as
a fiction, the writers proceed to describe the functions of government. The State
as government is actually a discussion of government founded on a fictitious
entity. Even before the Linguistic Turn and Postmodernism, we're off on the
wrong foot.
  A discussion of government and its basis is very different from a discussion of
government based on the foundation of a fictitious State. The foundation of our
government is the Constitution. There is absolutely no doubt about it's existence
as a crafted document of government that sets out, what I have called, a triadic
form of government. Hence we go around the early concepts of the State. We
can still use the term "State", but not as a fundamental entity that grounds
government. We use it only as an abstract, organizational, principle of
government.
   But, the Constitution can also be viewed as an abstract principle of government.
Yes, but it is not a fiction. We have already established its real existence. Now,
we have to establish the government, as set out, on a real, not too abstract,
condition of functioning. For this to occur, we must view it as triadic because it
has an Executive Branch, a Legislative Branch and a Judicial Branch. These are
real concrete 'branches' that are continuously functioning and enforcing the
underlying structure of the Constitution. The bottom of the triad, through its
representatives, legislates laws; the Executive, executes them; and the Judicial,
interprets them. At this point, its important to notice that its the bottom, or the
People, that attempts to control the arrangement of triadic government by
passing laws and rules that retains the integrity of the triad. The Top of the
triad has no power to control except too comply with the Constitutional laws
and rules. The Judicial merely interprets them. But, at this point, several
contaminants can enter the picture. One, the Court can be "packed", Two is a
result of the first One, i. e. the Court follows party ideology. Objectivity
succumbs to party ideology. Well, no system is perfect, but it is the best. The
triadic form is the best form. Although the kinks in the above system become
glaringly obvious and are in need of repair, we, nevertheless, still have one
more huge hurdle to transend. That argument is what adds a new dimension
to political language and will be addressed in the next blog.