Any proposal that a person wishes to submit to the public should consider the following fundamental aspects of political science below. For this reason Study Hall was developed. It is our best wish that you are able to gain some wisdom from reading the information presented.

Chapter 1: The Reason Square

Introduction to the Square

While watching the national news in the past week you undoubtedly saw a Republican congressman debating one issue or another with a Democratic congressman.  Let's face it, usually they don't agree on anything.  The people who belong to the parties that represent these groups are much the same way.  For example, when a republican congressman gives a great speech, if a democrat is watching he or she will find a reason to disagree.  Unfortunately, the same is true for a republican watching a democrat.  The irony of this situation is that it is the government's job to meet the needs of both of these groups.  In this first chapter we will answer the following questions:

• What are the different groups that make up our society?
• Where do the political parties come from?
• How does the government meet the needs of people who are so vastly different?

Is it possible to bring these two groups together? To start off, first we must understand the individual parties and to do that we need to understand how they think, what they believe in, and in general, how these groups intend to solve the problems that have plagued society since the essence of time. To understand this the Reason Square was developed. The square was made so that everyday individuals can easily understand, relate to, and identify the beliefs of everyday people. The square begins by separating all current types of thought concerning politics.  As this was done four general areas emerged.  One is the division between liberty and control. Liberty is the responsibility a person is given, beyond the power of the government, to handle each individual freedom.  For example, the law gives certain citizens the freedom, to own and bare arms.  Liberty is the responsibility to keep the firearm locked up, out of the reach of children and when used, to be used correctly.  The other division is between more or less government. For example, some individuals believe government should pay for and run medical institutions, i.e. hospitals or nursing homes, while others believe those institutions should be left in the hands of the private sector to pay and run themselves. These divisions can show us how each political party thinks and why these groups have so much trouble coming together. The Reason Square will help understand these divides better.  It will also show you where the individual parties compare and also how they contrast.   Each party is encompassed within each individual circle, i.e. the Democratic Party lies within the red circle, the Republican the blue, Libertarian green, Communist purple.  The arrows indicate the degree to which an individual believes in less government (right), more government (left), less liberty (down), or more liberty (up).   A square as you know has four equal sides.   Each corner represents four isolated political views.  The circles connecting the corners represent where these views merge.   As noted by the graph the four corners are Socialist, Capitalist, Humanist, and the Moralist.

worked under these conditions, because the villages were made up of families. Each person in the village was some how interrelated to the others. Each citizen shared in the daily work of the village, as well as the profits.  Also because everyone was considered family there was little if any difference between rich and poor. Hillary Clinton's book, It Takes a Village is along this line of thought.

Socialism's foundation is rooted in protectionism. Protectionism is a belief that the government can protect it citizens from the risks, and dangers of life through the control found in nation law. Protectionism assumes a large portion of the population is not capable of handling specific liberties.  The socialist believes, if liberties are abused the simple response is to take those liberties away much in the same way a mother believes if a child's privileges are abused those privileges should be taken away.  When a child recklessly plays with matches they are at risk of getting burned.  The mother has two choices: either she may place the matches out of the child's reach or she may teach her child how to use matches responsibly. The socialist would advocate placing the matches out of the child's reach.   When it comes to government the socialist has a great desire to protect the population whether it is outlawing drug use to avoid the dangers of addiction or banning guns to give greater power and control to law enforcement, either way the socialist believes the government is attempting to better society through the loss of those liberties that maybe abused; other liberties may include: prostitution, gambling, abortion, euthanasia.

government, in the way of private ownership, privatization, etc., and also more liberty in the way of lower taxation, deregulation. Privatization is taking the government control or government regulations out of an institution and letting that institution run in the free market. Regulation is placing government restrictions on privately owned institutions. For example, the utility industries, i.e. the electric, gas, water, etc., must receive approval from the government in order to either raise or lower prices. Knowing this it becomes much easier to understand deregulation.  Deregulation is removing government restrictions on privately owned institutions, i.e. businesses, corporations, etc.  The socialist, however, has his solutions centered in more government, while removing specific liberties. This has lead one group to deeply despise, even hate, the ideas of the other.  The socialist will typically refer to the capitalist as greedy or uncaring, often using names such as capitalist leech.  The capitalist, in turn, has developed his own unique vocabulary for the socialist, such as communist, liberal, or bureaucrat. Going beyond that, often one group uses the other as an escape goat for all problems that exist in any given society.  This continues until one side will legally make criminals of the other. Environmental law is aimed directly at attacking the capitalist, while the capitalist has a tendency to ban or outlaw the sale of goods from socialist nations, such as, the sale or use of Cuban Cigars. Environmental Law is placing government regulations on private enterprise based on what is believed to be best for the ecological environment.  For example, business may not dump sewage into the ocean; burn hazardous chemicals in the way of air pollution, etc.  These groups do not conflict because one group is evil and the other is good, but more appropriately because the basis of their solutions to everyday problems collides.  These two groups also use different methods for achieving their desired results.  The socialist by instinct naturally turns to government to set down the groundwork for the nature of the society they desire. Capitalist, also using instinct will develop ways to by pass the system, or work around it.  For example, the capitalist will find ways to develop a market employ and sell services, even though the sale of such products and services has been outlawed.  This is because the capitalist believes that government can hinder, but not prevent a society from producing a supply from a desired demand.

Understanding the Humanist

chapter the natural process of government to develop its own power gradually destroys liberties as it did also in the case of Rome. One of the primary reasons for the downfall of the Roman Empire was the rise of the Christian movement, which brings us to the introduction of the Moralist.

numbers. This went right along with their beliefs: sacrifice on earth for reward in heaven.  Some scholars even believe that the Christian religion would have died out if not for the persecution brought on by the Roman Empire. Things like this take place not, because the beliefs of the humanist are bad, but because one group typically sacrifices their beliefs to oppose those of another, instead of seeing the beauty in all points of view.

parties agree upon.  These general solutions make each party unique.   By looking over the graph you will notice, however, that there is no political party for both the moralist and the humanist, nor the socialist and the capitalist.  This is because political parties are made through the unity of shared beliefs, which these groups do not share.   The first of these parties, which will be discussed, is the Libertarian Party.

During the 1980's Margaret Thatcher, the Chief Inspector of England, and Ronald Reagan were almost inseparable. Many in the United States believed she was a conservative Republican.  This, however, was not the case.  Margaret Thatcher was, in fact, a member of the Libertarian Party. There is a wide variety of difference between the Republican and the Libertarian.   While both groups share the belief that the solutions to the problem that plague society should be done without interference from the government, they differ on the amount of liberties that should be allowed within any given society.   This is because while the Republican has a strong moralist element the Libertarian has an equally strong humanist element.  In other words the liberties accepted by the Libertarians, i.e.: prostitution, gambling, drug use, are only accepted, because of the humanist element within the party.   In that same light, the liberties rejected by the Republican Party, i.e.: prostitution, gambling, drug use, are only denounced, because of the moralist element within the party.

How any individual believes is based on their perspective. Think of it like looking through a telescope, at one end objects are large and close, but turn it around and things become distant and small. Freedom for example, both the moralist and the humanist claim to offer personal freedom while claiming the other is virtual slavery.  The humanist claim is based on their relativism.  A humanist might say eat, drink, smoke pot, sleep with a prostitute, have fun enjoy life. The moralist opposed to this type of behavior is therefore seen by the humanist as opposed to freedom.  The moralists, however, knows that there are many activities that human nature draws to that can have devastating consequences.  For example, drugs carry with them dependency.  Sleeping with a prostitute can put an individual at risk for Aids or other Sexually Transmitted Diseases. Therefore the moralist believes that granting specific liberties leads to dependency or personal slavery.   More information about the Libertarian Party maybe found on their web site at http://www.lp.org/

Understanding the Republican Party

Understanding the Democratic Party

The other of the two main political parties is the Democratic Party. This party is made up of the red oval on the graph.   The Democratic Party is a major player in the game for many reasons.  The primary reason is, however, the very nature of capitalism itself.  Capitalism is very dynamic, changing almost on a daily basis.  Because of this no career is guaranteed to any individual. Also in a pure capitalist environment everything is earned.   This means that individual, which never prepared for retirement may work for the rest of their lives or individuals who got cancer and did not have insurance would be left to die.   The Democratic Party receives its strength by using the wealth of capitalism to increasing the power of the national government to meet the needs of everyday individuals.  The Democratic Party is primarily responsible for putting into place things like: the Social Security administration, Medicaid, Medicare, etc.   The Democratic Party also increases the strength of government by giving the authority to place regulations on industries and commercial organizations.  These governmental agencies which implement such regulations are designed to ensure the sanitation of the food we eat, safety of the homes we live in, as well as the quality of the air we breath.  All of these solutions have one major factor in common; they all increase the power and strength of the federal government, while diminishing the liberties of commercial industry in the private sector.  The Private Sector is any part of a society that is not under the control

of the government. This is noted in fig 1-1 with the left arrow labeled more government. More information about the Democratic Party maybe found on their web site at http://www.democrats.org/index.html.

Understanding the Communist Party

In the United States the Communist Party is probably the most unknown of the four parties. This is not the case around the world, however. Currently the Communist Party is the dominant political force in China, along with several other countries in the Middle East, as well as, a large portion of Europe and Asia. Law from a legal standpoint can be broken down into two major segments.  The first is dynamic law meaning changing depending on time or region.   Dynamic law is practice and belief that law should be based on culture and/or environment in which it is practiced.  Dynamic Law believes that whatever a majority of citizens believe in that area and time period is right for that area and that time. For example, in France the majority of citizens believe it is wrong to work more than ten months out of the year without a vacation, while in American it is common place, therefore if you practiced dynamic law you would believe that the law should prosecute individuals for over working in France, while at the same time punish Americans that take extended vacations.  Therefore dynamic law changes by location as well as culture. On the other side of the coin is Natural Law.  Natural Law is a strict view of what is right and what is wrong.  This is a belief that law should not change despite public opinion or region. Before the beginning of what is now known as communism members of this group were known as fundamentalist and often believed in a government along the lines of a Theocracy.  Theocracy is where the religion of that area has direct control of government institutions where law is inspired from religious literature. Many governments of the past and still today have been establishing through religious writings and opinions at the time. The fact that the communist has been so rigid toward religious liberties should not be of any surprise.  Over time this strict form of law has lead to wars between two different members of the same group.  This was evident in early times during the Crusades.  Both moralists, the Muslims and the Christians, fought over the control of Jerusalem, in fact, many wars in early times were over religion.  The conflicts existed because one religion was not compatible with that of another.   Also in a theocracy religion is the glue that essentially holds the nation together.  It is not surprising that most, if not all, theocracies banned the practice or teaching of other religions.

Communism also carries all these traits because it contains both the socialist and moralist elements within its domain.  In the United States the dominant religions place what is right and wrong on the basis of individual actions. In a nation under communism, however, morality is based on total equality. All individuals in a communist driven society are given the same pay and resources, however limited, as everyone else in the society.  This promotes the idea that capitalism, where wealth is harshly divided among different individuals, is evil or wrong. In this way the moralist is cut off from the capitalist, which in turn leaves the government as the only controlling power left.  The Socialist, who by nature believes solutions for problems that plague society, should be based in government, often whole heartily embrace communism. The humanist, however, does not. This is because the rigid laws involved turn off the humanist. Also the humanist is a supporter of dynamic law, whereas the communist party is rooted in natural law.  More information about the Communist Party maybe found on their web site at http://www.cpusa.org/.

Communism itself also follows many of the practices of Theocracy.  Communism bans all religions that do not follow the beliefs of communism.  This is done, as it was done under theocracies, because all other religions were seen as threats.    Communism also like Theocracy believes in natural law, where one law over rides all other systems and cultures.    This is because under communism there is no state or local power to give laws variation.

How the political parties interact with one another?

As time moves into the present age many wars have been moved from the battlefield to the halls of debate.  Some of these include the United Nations, the European Union, and the Asian Union of Nations.  These are places where diplomats from individual nations can attempt to settle their differences without going to war. All of these groups and debates start with nothing more than an argument. An Argument is verbal justification of a solution rooted within an individual's core beliefs. Surprisingly many opposing groups will use the same argument to defend their beliefs.  Take the capitalist and the humanist for example.  Many capitalists are opposed to banning firearms they may never own today, because of fear that this behavior may lead to the banning of all firearms.     On the other hand the humanist uses the same argument to defend their beliefs in pornography.  While many humanists may not view pornography, they fear if pornography is removed this trend may move toward the regulation of other things, such as, music or political speech.  These arguments exist because of the fear of incrimentalism. Incrimentalism is the attempt to alter or drastically change the beliefs of a society through the use of baby steps rather than giant leaps.

Many political parties have used this method in an attempt to gain the coveted 51% of the majority, in order to maintain power. This is accomplished by incrementally moving national beliefs slowly in your party's direction.  Hand in hand with this is the attempt to destroy the opposing political party. The most well known method used by the term "Divide and Conquer."  This is an attempt to divide the groups that make up the opposing political party while strengthening the unity within ones own party.   For example, the Democratic Party may attempt to separate the moralist and the capitalist elements of the Republican Party to further tear down Republican power.   Over time all of the political parties have sought to gain total control by attempting to find one argument that all the individuals on the graph could agree upon.   This is extremely difficult because agreement is only found in the dilemma and not the solution. For this reason alone there is no center to the graph.   The only things ever found in history to unite a society under a common cause is war, nationality and discovery.

National Unity

The Benefits of Opposing Arguments

In the long run, however, the evolution of one form of thought leads to the benefits of the opposite form. For example the first goods were bartered. Bartering is the process of negotiating the exchange of one good for that of another.   The capitalist view of negotiating for the best possible price is inefficient in itself. While this does produce a lower price for the consumer the time that is spent negotiating is wasted. Setting a standard price for goods, a Socialist rooted idea, generally lowers overall prices. The capitalist also has fewer costs in the way of fewer employees and more sales.  The difference can be seen in the pricing policies used in Mexico, where most goods can still be negotiated to a lower price, and those found in the United States where negotiations are seen as costly and impractical.

Using the Square to Understand Society

The square itself can help to understand many of the differences and conflicts in any given society.   For example, why is the conservative movement so much at odds with the mainstream media?   To answer this look at both the humanist and moralist parts of the graph. The moralist element of our society has been the strongest voice for the censorship of the mass media.  Many early Christians believed even going to a movie theater was a sin.   On the other side of the media industry as any other industry has the general desire to grow which put the industry in direct contrast to the moralist element in society.  This made the industry prone to hire the humanist element in our society, simply because the moralist element, opposed to the media in general, made little if any attempts to enter the field.

As we explore the square further you should become able to know the basic beliefs in each division of the square on an issue-by-issue basis.    The proceeding examples will be presented in the following manor:

The Study of Philosophy

The study of Philosophy comes in two general areas when it comes to government.  The first is ethics and the second is logic. This is primarily because as a species our political brain is separated into two general areas the Cerebral Cortex, our logical brain located on the outer portion of the brain and the Cerebellum, our emotional brain located in the middle. These two areas make up the bulk of thought we have including all of our ideas about government and politics.  This leaves a divide between which course of logic and ethics a society will choose.

The humanist and the moralist make up the ethical component of philosophy within the study of the government.   Take the issue of abortion for example:

Socialist United States of America: Every child should be a wanted child. All children share this need.  Some girls are having children at ages thirteen and fourteen.  These girls can't face their own parents; they are left alone in the world. Therefore the right to have an abortion should be shared by all so that girls that can't afford an abortion can later become women that are ready to take on the ultimate responsibly of raising a child.

Socialist China: A family should be limited to one child.  Food and resources are in limited supply. Huge families diminish these resources.  Few children therefore mean a hirer quality of life for each child and therefore a hirer quality of life for each individual.

Socialist Romania: The population growth has become stagnant.  The government much use want ever means necessary to increase our population.  The country itself has more labor demands and new technology increases. More children eventually mean more production and a hire standard of life for every individual.

Capitalist: If you want to have an abortion, have one, but to ask me to pay for your mistakes out of my wallet is wrong.

Humanist: A woman's body is their personal property and they have the right to use that body in anyway they see fit. If you personally don't like this don't have an abortion, but don't force your morality on me.

Moralist: A child, even before it is born, is still a life. Every individual regardless of the actions of their parents deserve a chance to live.  If a pregnant woman is murdered, have not two people died under the law.  Abortion in its essences is an attempt to avoid the responsibilities of an individual's behavior.  Adoption on the other hand is an acceptance of the responsibility of the actions of the parent. Abortion is murder and should be condemned by a society not encouraged.

As you can see both the moralist and humanist answer the question directly as it pertains to what they believe is ethically right or wrong, while both the capitalist and socialist seem more concerned with how abortion was implemented and not how it was actually used.  Yet they were still very much divided.   This is because the capitalist and socialist make up the logical element of philosophy found within the government.

Passion is what an individual cares for, thinks about, and dwells on.  Inspiration therefore is created through our passions.  For example, a boy that spends all his free time working on his car in the garage is more likely to reinvent the wheel as a man. This same is true for politics.  Some individuals are highly concerned about logical issues, such as, tax structure, regulations, and interest rates, while others are highly concerned about ethical issues: clean air, abortion, prayer, etc. We still have both a right and a left-brain and to one degree or another we have both a logical and ethical side. Where those logical and ethical values lie is in your own hands or rather in your own mind.  Perhaps the issues below will show you where your values lie.

Moralist                 Humanist                   Capitalist                      Socialist

Answer for yourself each of the issues above.  For each answer place a slash under the corresponding area.  For example if you are for the Death Penalty place a slash under the Moralist shown above.   Add up the slashes.  Circle the two groups with the most.  If you circled the Moralist and the Capitalist, than politically your values lie along Republican lines.  If you circled the Moralist and the Socialist, you tend to side with Communist ideals.  If you circled the Humanist and the Socialist you probably side with the Democratic Party and you the Humanist and Capitalist you most likely believe in Libertarian ideals.  Be as honest about how you feel as possible the answer may surprise you.

How the Republic Style of Government fills the Square?

For each and every idea you feel strongly about chances are there is someone in the room who feels equally strong that each one of your ideas are misguided or even wrong.  Yet you both live in the same nation under the same laws. Governments have long established ways to meet the needs of each one of these different groups.  The way these needs are met depends greatly on the type of government you are living under.  The Republic is the most common style of government found in our current world so we will look at it first.  

The Humanist, the first of our four groups, also receives representation through a free market press, as well as a local court system open and available for public use.  The first need, the media, is any source that takes public concerns within a society and voices those concerns to the society as a whole.     Free press, however, does not always mean that the press itself is free from any bias.    Often politicians will use this to their own advantage, through the use of spin.    Spin is any use of the media to deceive the public in favor of an individual, party, or group. The media itself plays right into the mold of Humanist theory because it plays to the needs of the local culture and population of any given area. Remember the Humanist does not believe in one right and one wrong.  The humanist believes that right and wrong are determined by culture, place and time.   For example, commercials and television shows in India do not show or sell people eating beef, because cows are sacred in India.  The media of that area seeks out those individuals believed to be making a profit off of beef in order to stop them.    This also helps to explain why the Humanist requires a local court system.  In this case a judge from India would be the most likely to understand why a case would be brought against an individual for having beef for dinner.   This could only be done locally, which is why the humanist is so strongly in favor of a local court system. 

The Capitalist, the second of our four groups, carries a strong desire for progress through competition.   The one of the best ways to meet these needs is achieved through a free market economy.   This is why business and capitalism go hand in hand.   This is why the Capitalist will fight so hard to stop any government interference in the business world.   The Capitalist believe pure competition will achieve the best prices and the greatest efficiency.  Oddly enough if the Capitalist has no government interference monopolies began to form. That is a business so powerful that it becomes inefficient by it's size while forcing other small competitors out of the market.   In the end these small market competitors team up with the socialist element of the square to force the monopolies out of power through the use of national law.  These laws are known as Antitrust laws.   Antitrust law is any law that attempts to break up the controlling powers of business.   The second method used by the government to meet the needs of the capitalist is a progressive tax system.  A Progress Tax System is any system of taxation where the percentage of taxes paid becomes greater as the income of a corporation or individual rises.  This also includes tax cuts for new businesses where startup costs are usually greater than revenue during the first year.   In the United States of America the top one percent of citizens pay 33% of all taxes paid on average each year. This does two things.  First, as businesses get more and more powerful and profits rise the tax burden in turn, also rises.  This burden forces big business to become more efficient while also giving smaller rising competitors an edge in the market place. Second it funds government projects that begin to build a middle class.    All of these things increase competition, which in turn meets the needs of the capitalist, to no surprise the capitalist is against all of these government interference's, but that has never stopped them competing in the market place.

The Moralist, the third of the four groups, carries a strong belief that the law is above any individual.  The moralist believes that human actions and conduct are accountable to a god or some other power greater than the individual themselves.  To meet the needs of the moralist governments established a strong criminal justice system.  Typically the greater the moralist element of a given society the harsher the penalty for crimes committed.  Incidentally, these societies tend to have to lowest crime rates.  Saudi Arabia is a perfect example.  In Saudi Arabia the penalty for stealing is the removal of a finger or hand.   Theft in that nation is almost nonexistent

The Moralist is also usually a strong believer in religion.  Freedom of religion helps to meet this need by allowing the moralists to practice religion without government interference.  This does not mean keeping religion from actively becoming involved in the government. The moralist has just as much right to a voice in government as any of the other groups.  Tax credits and exceptions for nonprofit organizations and religious institutions also help to meet this need.

Finally protecting the existence of Unions, Government Standards, and Public Works fulfills the Socialist beliefs in economic and social equality.  First by allowing Unions the government is allowing the socialists to actively seek for hirer wages without government interference, which would tend to dissolve the rights of the Capitalist.  Second, Standards are the measure of quality that must be achieved before a product maybe sold in the market place.  Standards tend to raise the quality of products in the poor communities, because typically communities who can afford to meet those standards usually have already.  Again achieving the economic equality sought by the socialist. Third, Public Works is the construction of a common good where the need is found to be the same on every social level and the expense greater than the private sector can efficiently manage. Public works meets the needs of the socialist because the community as a whole shares both the work and benefit.  Sewers, irrigation, telephone lines, power plants, are all examples of public works.

Governments who fail to fill the square, and how it led to their downfall.

Monarchies of ancient times often had Kings and Queens who dictated total control over their population. Every product and common good came about only as a result of government action thus cutting off any competition from the people of their nation.  Individuals began to believe they could produce goods better and more efficiently and the government. This created a huge uprising by the capitalist for a free market system.   Also the socialist saw the lack of economic equality between the Royalty and the common peasant.   The socialist joined the capitalist to force the some of wealth of the monarch to the rest of the population.  

Soon a small class of extremely wealthy individuals began to emerge while the rest lived in nearly total poverty.  Again many individuals believed they could compete more efficiently than these powerful monopolies, were forced out of business.  This is because individuals born into poverty during that time did not have the resources or education to compete. Some even became slaves in their own society.  This led the capitalists and socialists to merge once again.  One result of this was the creation of communism.  Communism can create an economic utopia for the socialist, at least for awhile, and it can also create a justice system that will meet the needs of some moralists, as well as a localized system of courts that met the needs of some humanists, however, the communist system as we will go into later does not allow for any competition of products or resources, which fail to meet the needs of the capitalist, also without a free press or freedom of religion the needs of the humanist and moralist can not totally be fulfilled either.  In the case of the Soviet Union head government officials began to prosper well above and beyond the normal class to a point the socialist could no longer tolerate.  This once again led to the unity of the socialist and the capitalist, because the socialist and capitalist represent all the academic and setup needs of a society, when they join, no government has ever been able to stop them.  In the next chapter, the cycles of government, we will further look and the history of government, and how it has evolved to the present day.

Chapter 2: Government Life Cycle

A government can be compared to a human being. Governments, like people, have a beginning.  Most people fall in love at least one, most will get a job, plus most will raise a family.  Obviously, no two people are the same. Governments, too, like people, are different and yet the same. Modern Psychology has analyzed thousands of people.  Through such analysis Psychology has identified fundamentally traits that are in every human being. Under careful study, trends are observed; then patterns of behavior. Today many behaviors that went unnoticed, such as the middle age crisis, are now identifiable in the lives of many. By looking at governments of the past, it is possible to pick up on their trends and patterns.  The ultimate goal is to understand the phases of government so well, that it becomes predictable. In this page we will discuss:

• The historical need for government
• The first monarchies
• Beginning and end of government
• How to prolong the life of government

In the beginning of time men and women worked just to feed their family.People began to organize into societies to take advantage of the crops and goods of their neighbors, as well as their friends and family.  This was most evident during the early history of the United States during the massive westward migration. The abundant wild life and natural resources gave these early settlers the right to live wherever they chose.  To do that however meant a loss for supplies and goods, such as medicine and farm equipment that was more readily available in an urban area.  Over time these small communities, as it was with the early Americans, began to amass wealth. The more wealth these small societies created, the more they became targets for thieves and raids. In the same way early Americans lost horses and supplies to Native American attacks.   During these attacks the American government stepped in to help elevate this problem. Unfortunately, the earliest men and women of history did not have this luxury, because there was no existing government.  This created the need for the first monarchies, which were nothing more than rule by king.  The king took the job of defending the society so that the everyday business of the society could continue without the threat of theft, vandalism, rape, or even death. Over time however the king would increase his own power by taking freedoms away from his own people. For example, by increasing taxes a king could increase his own wealth by taking wealth from the tribe he represents. The people of the kingdom know a king that abuses his own power as a tyrant.  During the age of knights and kings news traveled by rumor and stories this was because the mass media: newspapers, radio, television, did not exist then as it does today.  One such popular story during those days was the story of Robin Hood.  This is only one of many stories where a king abused the power given him under the throne.  Even in the case of Robin Hood, the abuse of power did not happen over night.  Unfortunately after this course of government begins it is usually continued until the power of the tyrant so greatly out weighs the power of the people that they revolt and revolution takes hold.   One case made popular by the movie "Brave Heart", was the freedom of Scotland in 1314.  In this case the English king abused his power by giving English Lords sexual rights to Scottish women.  It was that decree that pushed most Scots over the line and into war.  This happens and has happened when their government is not only not meeting the needs of the people, but the government itself has become the enemy. Should the revolt succeed, the leaders and family of such governments were usually executed.  To avoid this, leaders often turned the military on their own citizens.  This is a strategy to prolong the present government by using fear and control to delay any revolution. This is the beginning of what is presently known as a " police state" where the government directly commands its people through the use of the military. This can lead to three possible outcomes.

The result of government control

The first possibility is a simple revolt.  The previous example of Scottish Independence is one of many examples where people have revolted and put the country in a state of revolution. Even in this example the English king used his military to institute law.  Many people believe it would never come to that state in our world today. Unfortunately this is not the case. 

The second possible outcome was recently seen in Haiti, where the military successfully took over the government.  If you remember correctly the dictators were bought off by the United States. The real danger however happened months early when the Haitian government put the military on the streets to maintain order.   In the beginning the military presence was small.  Unfortunately instead of dealing with the problems at hand by listening to the citizens of his country President Jean Bertrand Aristide merely increased military involvement to compensate for civil unrest. Civil Unrest is another way of saying the people are revolting because their basic human needs are not being met.  This can only continue so long until the military leaders become self-aware of their power and use that power to institute a military dictatorship, as was the case here.  Military dictators usually get where they are because of a general desire to increase their own power, as it was during the up rising in Haiti.  A Military Dictator's desire for power only increases the peoples desire for freedom, making the dictatorship short-lived before a successful revolution takes hold.   To understand this, it is essential to understand that the life of government can last thousands of years, as it did during the dynasties in China, to that of a few days as is the case in Somalia where rule jumps from one military power to the next. Should a revolution be successful, a new government that better deals with the needs of its people will be established. Until a time when this new government becomes corrupt and no longer deals with the needs of its people, till once again the people revolt. The final option is simply to grant the citizens more freedom, by giving them what they ask for. Most would naturally see this as the simplest solution.  In early history, however, this was not the case.    Freedom, of course, does not come about without some form of conflict.  Apartheid in South Africa is such a case.    Apartheid is the belief that one race is deemed to make superior decisions than that of another and therefore less than superior races are denied basic voting rights. On April 26^th, 27^th, 28^th 1994, to avoid an internal revolution the South African government gave black citizens the power to vote.  Soon after that a man by the name of Nelson Mandela was elected President. What many people forget, however, is that to achieve such liberty Nelson Mandela spent half a lifetime in prison. As President Nelson Mandela has been primarily responsible for many changes including the writing of a new constitution granting numerous new liberties to the citizens of South Africa.

How to graph the cycles of government

What you have just read is a cycle, process by which all governments since the beginning of time repeat. As you will be shown throughout this book, societies have evolved strategies to prolong the life of their government while making it accessible to the changes brought on by technology and growth. There are two things just about all governments have in common.  They all start from a revolution with a great deal of freedom and they usually end under a dictatorship where their leaders usually command total control. Using these facts as a guide we can graph the stages, cycle, and placement of most governments throughout history. This can be done by using liberty on the vertical axis and using time on the horizontal axis. The status of government is the line. Fig. 2-1 is a graphical representation of this cycle.

The general trend downward shows how a government initially gives its citizens a great deal of liberty and then slowly moves toward a police state.   After a revolution liberty of the individual citizen goes up dramatically because the government no longer command control of its population. In these longer lasting governments attempts are make to prolong the life of the government by granting individual liberties. This is shown on the graph by the small spikes upward.  Today this solution is becoming the most common.  A full evolution of this can be seen through the English government.  As with the beginning of early civilizations the English, a relatively recent civilization, started as a series of warring clans.  A clan or tribe is the birth of organized government, existing by a small group of people who are all interrelated in one form or another. The wars continued between these tribes until the Norman invasion. William the bastard united the clans to form the first recognizable form of England.  William also set up the first justice system made up of nobles and lords.  Even though this system was quite primitive it greatly enhanced liberty, by giving the common citizen some voice, if only a small one, in their government.  If not for the creation of some form of justice system the unity among the clans would have been shortly lived. Liberty, for those who don't know, is the responsibility a person is given, beyond the power of government, to handle individual freedom.  Often the words freedom and liberty are confused. Freedom is the privileges and rights given an individual by law or superseded by ones own lifestyle. The difference is that liberty is a constant where as freedom is relative to the individual.  The next major evolution of the English government was the development of the English parliament. In this case power over the initial kingdom was taken away from the king.  The king, however, remained some power over the outside empire, i.e. India and the United States. In each of these cases England relinquished some of its power to save the kingdom.

American Revolution

1) British won the French and Indian War- Winning the war gave the colonists more freedom, in the way of more resources and movement because of the land acquired the upward movement on the graph notes this. 

2) Stamp Tax is enacted – The Stamp Act was levied against the colonists directly from Parliament without any consideration given to the local governments in America. Parliament did this to increase their control over the colonies thus noted on the graph moving the civilization downward toward more control. This gave rise to the statement no taxation without representation.  Taxes also diminish freedom by giving the common citizen few goods and resources available through monetary means. 

3) Stamp Tax is Repealed – The repeal of the Stamp Act gave some legitimacy back to the local colonial governments. This also gave tax relief to the population. In both cases the colonists received more freedom as noted by the graph. 

4) Tea Tax- The tea tax like the stamp tax was forced on the colonists to re-enforce the power of Parliament over the colonists, where as, the Stamp Act was mainly enacted as a source of revenue to pay off the debts from the French and Indian war.   Note the movement upward toward more control on the graph.

5) Military Rule in Boston – Any type of military rule is an obvious movement toward control of one society against that of another. Many times this act alone leads to revolution.  

6) Declaration of Independence – This document caused the total break between England and the United States.    When the controlling power is removed the control is removed and almost total liberty remains, at least until a new controlling power emerges.

In the case of the American Revolution it was shown that war could take place not because the style of government is different, but because their place on the slope in different.  In this case the effect of law from the parliament had one effect in England and the   complete opposite effect on the colonies in America. This takes place when the laws are not made equally throughout the empire. Since then several evolutionary changes have occurred throughout England.  The most notable changes: the abolition of slavery, women's right to vote, establishment of the European Union, have, through history, had also taken place in many regions through out the world.

Fig 2-3: English Empire

1) British won French and Indian War- Winning the war gave the British more resources through trade with the colonists, however, this also left England with huge war debts that must paid. Note on the two graphs the colonist received far greater amounts of freedom from winning the war than the English did.

2) Boycott of British goods by the colonists- England at this time in history made most of its profits through trade. Also the greater amounts of liberty received through winning the war through more trade through resources is also gone.  To compensate for this more taxes were collected from the English commonwealth, which in turn lead to greater amounts of control as noted on the graph. 

3) Stamp Tax is repealed, Parliament declares ultimate rule over the colonists – Less tax revenue from the colonists means less social services for the English Citizen, which in turn gives them less liberty.   The Parliament declares cares power only when used against the rule of the local colonial governments and at this point the law is not being used.

4) Boston Tea Party- Loss of resources without reimbursement alone is always a loss of freedom, but in this case the British government is losing control of their authority in that area and thus trade and other resources are steadily diminishing.  This also led to the deployment of troops, which cost more valuable resources.   All these cases resolute in a loss of liberty on the British side.

5) Declaration of Independence – The British loss all control over the colonies. Taxes and resource are used to attempt to once again gain control over the colonies.  All of this is set on the shoulders of the British citizen.

6) French ally with the colonists and declare war on England – French at that time was a major world power.  With a large portion of British troops in America this put the English Empire at risk of invitation, which also means more taxation and