progressivism, individualism, and the public ... - Telmarc Group

The Telmarc Group
PROGRESSIVISM, INDIVIDUALISM, AND THE PUBLIC
INTELLECTUAL
by the world view. The architecture may be the written, spoken, or even unspoken set of
rules as to what the government is doing. In a sense the basic architecture that we started
with was the Constitution, and as time has gone by, as Sunstein, and many of the others
we have dealt with as the Progressives and neo-progressives, they see it as a malleable
plan which can and should be changed to meet the changing world view.
The world view is the core framework of the mindset that those who govern bring with
them to the table and what they use along with the other tools available to craft and
restructure the architecture. Thus Reagan was somewhat of a neoliberal in a Lockean
sense, with a bit of the laissez faire attitude towards markets and Government regulation.
Obama is a strong neo-progressive, seeing the world in just the opposite direction, and
thus interpreting the Constitution in a manner requiring strong Governmental
intervention. Like TR and even to some degree Wilson, Obama seems to view the
capitalist elements in an "us versus them" world, as cause of everything from the
financial collapse, global warming, loss of jobs and the list would go on. TR had similar
views on Trusts and their power a century ago.
What we see often is not the "world view" of the governing class, we see only their
interpretation of the architecture via the acts the execute. The world view we will argue is
critical to understand and all too often the world view is seen through the architecture
implemented. Thus there is a deconstructing of a world view through the structures and
actions taken.
The concept of an architecture has been a cornerstone in the development of new system,
whether it be a technological system, political system, business system or social system.
For example the US Constitution is in essence the architecture for the United States and
its operations. However, the structural elements which make up these architectures have
often not played a role in the development of policies. We will develop the concept of an
architecture as a means to understand the network as both a market and regulatory entity,
and will provide a new set of perspectives for viewing the network in terms of a new
paradigms and world views.
The architecture is composed of the elements and the elements are reflected in the
effectors which perform the functions of the elements. In a building the element may be a
beam and the effector may be a steel reinforced concrete beam. In a political system the
legislator may be an element and the effectors are the senators and representatives, the
actual people performing the function.
An architecture, thus, first, requires that the underlying system be treated in terms of a set
of commonly understood elements and that these elements have a clearly demarcated set
of functions and interfaces that allow for the combining of the basic set of elements. The
way the elements then can be combined, reflected against the ultimate types of services
provided, determine the architecture. Thus for a government we may think of the
elements as the executive, legislative and judicial, but that is but one of many
alternatives.
Page 189