Thanks. I was trying to connect a lot of dots and still make it readable, if not entirely digestible.
What you are trying to devise is an organic system of governance, but you are running up against the reality that anything that is organic, is mortal.
In order to work, government has to be both trusted and worth the effort entailed. These are not always compatible, as often the effort entailed involves some degree of predation of those not in positions of power.
It is that inherent tension between desire driving us and decisions that have to be made, for better, or worse. We can't have our cake and eat it too.
Our country has tiered government, with county, state and federal government working, trying to work, at the levels they are most effective.
The most successful democracies work in various forms of edge societies. Either in locations where natural forces require the physiological engagement of everyone, either indigenous communities that can't grow larger then can function organically, or in places where surviving against nature doesn't allow the excess growth those in power can use against their own subjects, or in situations that it is essentially virgin territory, such as the US, in terms of growth, or Rome, where their adoption of both social and mechanical technologies gave them an advantage, but which as they gained power, was used to coalesce authority.
Once a power structure starts to coalesce, it only tends to be replaced by similar power strutures, as the old ones grow too corrupted, or their resource advantages break down. Oligarchies get replaced by next generation oligarchies, until the ecosystem can no longer support them and society returns to that edge situation.
The biggest problem for the United States is that society doesn't recognize that while government is analogous to a central nervous system, banking and money are analogous to the circulation system and blood. So to the extent we are well on the way to becoming an oligarchy, the financial foundations of this were set by the late 19th century and formalized with the establishment of the Federal Reserve banking system. Where the rewards of owning and running the banking system are privatized, while the risks are socialized. The good old public/private partnership at work.
Though banking can't be a direct function of government either, like the nervous system and circulation system serve the different dynamics of synchronizing the body, while harmonizing its energies and resources.
Obviously this is a somewhat rough observation, but the point is that I don't think our problems can be solved at a political level. People are what they are. They can only know a limited number of others well, they have very finite life spans. Their conceptual frameworks tend to set early in life and don't easily change that much. They will advange themselves and those they know over those they don't. And, most important, they are driven by their desires and logic is often little more than rationalization. The mind only referees the emotions.
Given the best times for serious change, from geology to society, are when the general equilibrium has been seriously disrupted and new environments start to emerge and coalesce, the coming societal and economic implosion, along with environmental changes and disruptions, will offer the most profound opportunity for serious change humanity will have, for the foreseeable future.
Yet in order to prescribe oughts, serious consideration have to be given to the is. Which is sort of what I tried with that essay. To describe and clarify the underlaying physical, biological and physiological forces at work. It is a quite rough outline, but I'm trying to organize many of these ideas in my own mind and writing it down helps.
As the essay is titled, we are still at the start of this coming upheaval. More at the stage where the old is just starting to burn down, long before any opportunity to start building anew.
Trying to patch the system as it is, is applying a bandaid to a terminal problem. We need to ignore the surface and understand what is driving the events. Study causes, rather than effects. Most people are focused on the immediate, so it's not an approach that is going to have broad appeal, but popularity isn't the issue, it's about understanding where the future is headed and how to steer it in a more overall beneficial direction.
Getting out over the horizon, as most people are focused on the waves currently crashing on the beach.
Aim for the future.
