Government traditionally consists of three branches: the executive, the legislative and justice. At the highest level, the three functions had been conflated early in the Roman Republic (in the times of “Tribunes with Consular Powers“). Yet, as the State became enormous and subtle, those functions became increasingly distinct. The notion of “State of Law” evolved into ever more prominence. Galla Placidia, reigning Roman empress and “Augusta“ proclaimed the “State of Law” very clearly in the Fifth Century.
She explained that the supremacy of the law required that it be applied to all, including, herself, the head of state. Equally.
During the European Middle Ages, Roman secular law, refurbished by Augustus Justinian around 540 CE, was a buttress against falling into what the areas conquered by Islam fell into (the arbitrariness of The One, anointed by “god” as a “messenger“).
For example, seven centuries after Justinian’s 40 year reign, the king of France “Saint” Louis admitted that he wanted to stab those who did not believe Christ in the belly, so that they would suffer more, but he could not do it, because it was against the (Roman secular) law!
Said Roman secular law became the foundation of all modern law, and United Nation law. Early on the Franks were equipped with their own tribal law, the Salic law (itself written originally in Latin), but they used it as an epiphenomenon on the main body of Roman law.
As the Franks were Roman authority in Gallia, Francia, and Germania, they adopted readily Justinian’s modifications. Their (re)conquest of most of Western Europe (507 CE-1066 CE), and their Renovatio Imperium Romanum (800 CE), insured that Roman law was European law for more than 2,000 years (most of the time, but for the occasional crusade, religious war, Spanish Inquisition, or bout of fascism a la Louis XIV, Napoleon, or Hitler).
Parliaments in the Middle Ages played the role of the Roman Senate. And they worked from the Roman legal system. France had 16 regions and 16 parliaments. They had to sign on any legislative, or constitutional change.
The parliament in London was endowed with extraordinary powers (much of them attributed when Montford tried to use it to become king). After the Republic nearly came back from action of the Paris parliament, little desirous to see in France what the London parliament had done (vote for cutting off the king’s head), the fascist youth, Louis XIV, shut them down (they were re-established by the revolutionary Louis XVI, and then they, in turn, shut down his attempts at making the plutocrats pay enough taxes).
I propose four branches of government: executive, legislative, justice… and TRUTH.
We need Truth Courts. One in the USA, one in Europe (although major European countries could have their own). Even the UN could have its own. A Truth Court could provide with unbiased opinions about various subjects such as Arctic Drilling, GMOs, Nuclear Technologies, circumcision and excision, stoning lesbians, drug legalization, and meta subjects, such as Much of FOX Is POX, etc.
We need Truth Courts to handle delicate subjects, and not just what were the forces behind Hitler, but also what are the forces behind the military-industrial complex, and the gifts it brings.
One of these gifts is the F35 “low observable” fighter-bomber that USA based military plutocrats persuaded many representatives of taxpayers in many countries to subsidy.
So far the program has cost 400 billion dollars, and not one single plane has entered service fully (although the plane has been “produced” since 2006). The cost is staggering: the Norwegian defense ministry admitted it could be as much as 762 million dollars per plane (the Pentagon had admitted only half that… so far, but recognized maintenance would be very expensive, easily doubling the price).
In truth, this is corruption at the highest order. As I will show in an accompanying essay, if the aim is really defense, an alternative offers itself, cheaper, safe and effective.
The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, Nelson Mandela’s great idea, has allowed South Africa to not go the way, of, say Algeria, or India. Both of these countries were torn apart, and have known war, civil or not, religious or not, more or less, ever since.
If Gandhi had been as smart as Mandela, not only would India, the Raj, not have split into three pieces, with millions dead, dozens of millions exiled, and a criminal and expensive arms race since, plus now the Damocles sword of nuclear war, but, moreover, other countries would have heeded the example (and Algeria would not have known 60 years of more or less hot uncivil war, plus millions exiled, and less economic opportunities for much of Europe, and all of North Africa!)
DEBATE ON TRUTH AS A BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT:
This house holds that: To insure civilizational veracity, we need a Truth Court. A new independent, secular institution. It would only provide with Truth Opinion. (Quite a bit like the Roman Senate provided only with Senatus Consulte, counsel, or advice, from the seniors…)
PA: Yes. However, the mandate of factcheck.org, is, so far very limited as it checks mostly on USA politicians and their PACs. It is also privately financed. I am thinking of something huge, financed publicly, and to act as the fourth pillar not just of government, but of civilization. To find out all the facts, and likely consequences, related to human impact on the atmosphere, oceanosphere, geology and the biosphere, would be a primary target.
Andy Outis Would the jurisdiction of this court only apply to the fact-based community, or would Fox News audiences have immunity?
PA: Such a court would inform the commons that Much of FOX Is POX.
Andy Outis That happens on a daily basis. Their viewership doesn’t seem to care.
PA: They are living the lie. A Truth Court would help those who are addicted to lying sober up. It would be like being told that alcohol, or cigarettes are not good for health. Much of what passes for News at Fox News would be denounced as bad for mental health… by an independent governmental branch. Thus my proposition for four branches of government: executive, legislative, justice, TRUTH.
Andy Outis But that would take away their constitutional rites to be as ignorant as they wanna be!! Downright un American!!
PA: It’s indeed a rite, not a right. A tribal rite.
Patrice Ayme (with thanks to A. Helligar and A. Outis).