It is not any constitution, charter, or public institution that can limit the size and scope of government. All of those documents and offices are governmental by their nature and as such, skew toward the favor of the incumbent. In other words, relying on governmental institutions to limit the sphere and activity of government are doomed to fail from the onset. It is only those members that call for, institute, and empower governments that can be the true check on governmental over-reach. This is another way of saying; “We The People” are the ultimate arbiter of the role and limits of government in our lives.
Technologies of the 18th century allowed for participation in governance on an infrequent basis. Regular meetings, such as voting assemblies, were constituted for the convenience of a largely agrarian society that relied upon great amounts of time and labor attending to crops and livestock. As such, the legacy constitutions and administrative processes of yesteryear are no longer suitable for the society of today that works with technologies driving a largely knowledge based economy.
With this in mind, it is highly conceivable that governmental structures, based upon the need for social cooperation, mutual security, and common defense, can take advantage of information age technologies to deliver the highest quality services at the lowest possible price. Logic dictates that the only way to truly know what a customer wants is by what she or he actually selects at the point of sale. Voting with a purchase is evidenced by the transaction. All other attempts to divine the customer’s intentions are pure speculation, and as such, the only way to truly know what government services are most desirable is to make them as customizable as possible.
Similarly, envisioning customizable service provision in the information age allows for the customization found in selecting the various degrees of insurance coverage. The level of deductible risk assumed by the customer, the level of coverage, the degree of luxuries provided by a service plan are all scalable based on open platforms, selectable with the click of a mouse. The premiums for these services are readily available so that consumers can make informed cost to benefit decisions.
Of course, those with greater valued assets to protect are likely to call for greater service plans. Assuming higher valued, more comprehensive service plans will likely provide positive benefits to others in their vicinity and these proportionate service plans will generate a tendency toward increasing capital values. The mutual reinforcement of benefits derived from specialization in security, defense, and dispute resolution services offers the potential for ever-increasing standards of living, as capital asset values raise and processes become more efficient.
Yet, even in this advanced concept of division of labor in the defense and security field, the ultimate arbiter remains the individual. “We The People”; not as one homogeneous mass, but as individuals grounded in the power to choose, the power to collaborate with those sharing our interests…and the power to reject, forcibly if necessary, those that would encroach upon our ability to be the author of our own destiny.