There is a story told at Mt. Vernon about George Washington’s famous boat ride on the Potomac River. With him in the boat were two sworn enemies, Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton. Jefferson’s vision of America was of an “Agrarian Democracy.” Hamilton’s vision emphasized “Entrepreneurial Capitalism.”

While Washington did not have the depth of knowledge of either, his vision was of “Inclusive Relating.” And so it was that when the trio embarked upon their journey into the future of America, Washington insisted upon “Mutual Thinking for Mutual Purposes” and so generated the first definition of “Interdependency.” He threatened not to return his processing partners to land until they had merged their thoughts in one vision of America.

They did merge and America did emerge. Thank God!

The merged vision was encapsulated in the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain and King George’s “History of repeated Injuries and Usurpations, all having in direct Object the Establishment of our absolute Tyranny over these States.”

In the 1776 Declaration of Independence, the “Rights and Responsibilities of Leadership,” were firmly established:

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the Governed, that whenever any form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

In the preamble to the United States Constitution of 1787, our “Founding Fathers” began by defining its citizens as policy-makers:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

For the first time in the history of humankind, the citizens were empowered by constitutionally-mandated powers to direct the governance of the United States.

Accordingly, all governing powers were invested in a representative form of democracy with an all-important “Balance of Powers:”

• All legislative powers were vested in a Congress, consisting of a Senate and House of Representatives (Article I).
• All executive powers were vested in a President (Article II).
• All judicial powers were vested in one Supreme Court with inferior courts in support (Article III).

With articles calculated to define States Rights (Article IV), Amending Processes (Article V), and Pre-existing Conditions (Article VI), the Constitution was adopted and ratified.

While the focus of the U.S. Constitution was upon governance, related dimensions were soon to emerge as pre-potent conditions of a free and evolving citizenry. Some were in apparent conflict.

In the interest of the 2008 election, we are going to present you with the following scales for awarding “Freedom Scores” to the candidates.

This brief and cryptic history reveals that George Washington became the model for the presidency of these United States long before his election. In other words, the presidency was defined in terms of his own executive characteristics:

• Inclusive in relating;
• Participation in governance;
• Entrepreneurial in enterprise.

These dimensions defined the enduring character of the presidency and its candidates.

Relating reflects Washington’s strongest attribute. Of course, through the centuries, the emigrant and migrant population of the U.S. have modified this dimension to emphasize relating to culture and class.

Cultural Relating reflects the levels of relationships that take place within, between, and among cultures. Cultural relating is the phenomenon that transformed America from a “boiling cauldron of exclusivity” to a “melting pot of diversity.”

Only in America during the second half of the 20th century did “Human Relating” skills-building experiences take hold with classes and cultures. Only in America did this Human Relating culminate in “Interdependent Processing.”

We may view the Cultural Relating Scale in Table 1. As may be noted, the levels are developmental from 1 to 5. Independency is the threshold learning experience. This means that relators are empowered to move independently up or down. Below level 3, the relations are competitive and dependent. Above level 3, the relations are collaborative and interdependent.

At level 3, Independency, relators share individual images of experiences or phenomena with each other. This makes all initiatives possible. Independency is illustrated by the behavioral operations of “Get and Give:” Each “gets” the others’ images before “giving” his or her images.

At level 4, Collaboration, the relators share images in order to converge or “merge” images. The behavioral operations of “Get, Give, and Merge” are based upon decision-making with participants’ values and environmental or contextual requirements. A productive “merged” image serves to maximize meeting all values and requirements at the highest levels.

At level 5, Interdependency, the relators have already “merged” images before “going” to interdependent processing. The behavioral operations of “Merge and Go” illustrate interdependency. The behavioral operations of “mutual processing for mutual benefit” define interdependent processing.

Table 1. Cultural Relating Scale

Below level 3, the relations are competitive and/or dependent. At level 2, Competitiveness, orders are given and tasks are performed. Behaviorally, this level is manifested in “Give and Go” orders. There is no “getting” of images from the others’ frames of reference.

At level 1, Dependency, there is no attempt to even relate to give orders or instructions. Behaviorally, this is communicated only by “Go” and reduces the actor to helplessness and dependency.

Now you may rate yourself or others on Cultural Relating. As helpers or leaders of others (parent, teacher, supervisor, manager, representative) rate whether you or others engage in the following Relating Behaviors:

Ratings of Cultural Relating

You may be surprised or even shocked at the levels of Relating Behaviors. Most people rate themselves at Level 1 and pride themselves at Level 2 (Authoritarian).

In summary, relating is a necessary stage in all human endeavor. It ensures that all parties—those acting and being acted upon—have input and feedback to the process. At the highest levels of interdependent processing, it ensures the mutual benefits to which we dedicate our processing.

Again, the function of Cultural Relating is Peaceful Relations within, between, and among the citizens of the nation, its states, and their local communities.

Ultimately, we get what we process for—interdependently and continuously.

When Washington refused “The American Kingship,” he defined the presidency as a representative of “We the People,” the constitutionally-mandated policy-makers. This was the Constitution’s greatest vision: An Enlightened Citizenry.

Enlightened Citizenry reflects the levels of citizen participation within, between, and among governments. An enlightened citizenry is what transformed America from “dependent minions of colonial justice” to “constitutionally-mandated policy-makers of governance.”

While empowered by the Constitution of 1789, it was not until 1870, after a great Civil War, that race, color, and conditions of servitude were eliminated as conditions of the right to vote (Amendment XV). Further incriminating, it was not until 1920 that sex was eliminated as a condition of the rights of citizens. To be sure, it was not until the second half of the 20th century—following World War II—that Americans began to understand the meaning of “We the People.” We have since led the movement for World Governance and World Justice. Indeed, the success of this movement is contingent upon the success of “The Great Experiment:” American Cultural Relating, Participative Governance, and Free Enterprise.

We may view the Participative Governance Scale in Table 2. Once again, the levels are developmental. Also, level 3, Independency, is the threshold learning experience that enables independence of direction. Below level 3, the authoritarian and totalitarian governance systems dominate. Above level 3, the enlightened and representative systems dominate as critical sources of empowering citizens.

At level 3, Independency, would-be participants share both democratic and authoritarian governance responses. This is illustrated by the behavioral operations of “Get and Give.” Each participant “gets” the images of others before “giving” his or her own image.

At level 4, Representation, participants share images in order to “merge” new images. The “merged” images center around the definition of direct participation in democracy “as the level most facilitative of participative governance.” The behavioral operations of “Get, Give and Merge” serve to maximize meeting producers’ values and governance requirements.

Table 2. Participative Governance Scale

At level 5, Enlightened Citizenry, the citizens have already “merged” images of participative governance before “going” to interdependent processing for generating new missions for governance and justice. The behavioral operations of “Merge and Go” illustrate the enlightened interdependency.

Below level 3, the enterprise is constructed selectively by authoritarianism or totally by totalitarianism. At level 2, Authoritarian, orders are “given” in a discriminatory manner for the areas to be controlled. There is no “getting” of images as the “Give and Go” behavioral operations dominate.

At level 1, Totalitarian, there is implied coverage of the totality of the human experience as communicated only by the direction, “Go!”

Again, you may rate yourself or others on Participative Governance. As a helper or leader, rate yourself or others in the following Participative Behaviors:

Ratings of Participative Governance

Once again, you may be surprised or shocked at the low levels of Participative Behaviors. For example, if a representative does not “get” your image on an issue, then he or she is not even minimally effective in that role.

Remember, the function of Participative Governance is Participation within, between, and among the citizens of the nation, its states, and local governance.

Ultimately, enlightened citizenry is a necessary condition of all civilized governance. It ensures that generative initiatives drive the balanced governmental process: legislative, executive, judicial. Again, at the highest levels, We the People are positioned as policy-makers in the process of governance.

In short, we get what we earn by the initiatives that we generate through interdependent processing as Enlightened Citizens.

Perhaps the least known attribute of Washington was his entrepreneurial initiative. While fulfilling Jefferson’s ideal of democratic leadership, he also exemplified Hamilton’s ideal of free enterprise. For example, during the Revolutionary War, he not only led the troops but fed the troops from his agricultural and nautical harvests. Not knowing whether he would ever get paid or, indeed, knowing that he would be executed if we lost the war, Washington modeled both the ideation and the risk-taking of the American entrepreneur.

Free Enterprise reflects the levels of enterprising relationships within, between, and among economies. Free enterprise is the phenomenon that transformed America from a “colonial economy” to the “economic leader of the world.”

Only in America during the second half of the 20th century did “Entrepreneurial Capitalism” take hold in all areas and levels of economic enterprise. Led by America’s Free Enterprise, “Entrepreneurial Capitalism” served to lead the world to explosive and sustained socio-economic growth.

We may view the Free Enterprise Scale in Table 3. Once again, the levels are developmental from 1 to 5. Also, level 3, Independency, is the threshold learning experience that allows independence of direction. Below level 3, the command and control enterprises dominate. Above level 3, the entrepreneurial and the capitalistic enterprises dominate as the critical sources of generating wealth.

At level 3, Independency, would-be producers share both capitalistic and socialistic or command images of economic enterprise. This is illustrated by the behavioral operations of “Get and Give.” Each “gets” the images of others before “giving” his or her image of enterprise.

At level 4, Capitalism, producers share images in order to “merge” new images. The “merged” images center around the definition of capitalism as “the ingredients that are most important to generating wealth.” The behavioral operations of “Get, Give, and Merge” serve to maximize meeting producers’ values and marketplace requirements:

Table 3. Entrepreneurial Enterprise Scale

At level 5, Entrepreneurial Enterprise, the entrepreneurs have already “merged” images of capitalistic sources of wealth before “going” to interdependent processing toward generating the wealth. The behavioral operations of “Merge and Go” illustrate entrepreneurial interdependency.

Below level 3, the enterprise is constricted selectively by command or totally by control. At level 2, Command, orders are “given” for the specific areas to be controlled. Behaviorally, this level is manifested in “Give and Go” orders. There is no “getting” of images from the other producers involved (suppliers and distributors, as well as consumers).

At level 1, Control, there is a total takeover of all marketplace decisions and this is communicated by the totalitarian command, “Go!”

Once again, you may rate yourself or others on the Entrepreneurial Enterprise. As private or public sector helpers or leaders, rate yourself and others in the following Entrepreneurial Behaviors:

Ratings of Entrepreneurial Enterprise

Finally, you may again be surprised or shocked at the low levels of Entrepreneurial Behaviors. For example, whether you or others are in a public agency or private corporation or function as an individual entrepreneur, if you do not “Merge and Go” to process interdependently, you will not have “The Best Idea” and will have no comparative advantage in your entrepreneurial positioning.

In summary, Entrepreneurial Enterprise is a necessary condition of all socio-economic endeavor. It ensures that generative initiatives drive the GICCA Market Curve: Generating, Innovating, Commercializing, Commoditizing, Attenuating. Again, at the highest levels of entrepreneurial enterprise, it ensures the mutual benefits to which we dedicate our processing.

Recall that the function of Entrepreneurial Enterprise is Prosperity within, between, and among the citizens of the nation, its states and communities, and its business enterprises.

Ultimately, we get what we assume for our Entrepreneurial Enterprise—generating and innovating, risk-taking and managing.

Leaders espouse it!

Dictators abhor it!

People celebrate it!

Traitors betray it!

Nations grow with it!

It is inscribed in The Declaration of Independence—Life, Liberty, Happiness.

It is enshrined in The Bill of Rights to the U.S. Constitution—To speak our minds, to petition for grievances, to choose our worship.

It is culminated in the Amendments to the Constitution—XIII versus slavery and involuntary servitude; XV against racial discrimination; XIX in prohibition of sexual discrimination.

It is supported by major movements—Civil Rights, Human Rights, Global Peace and Justice.

It is protected by the “eternal vigilance” that Jefferson prescribed—our statesmen, our military and, most of all, our citizenry.

But no one has defined freedom in operational or behavioral terms!

Here we are guided best by those who hate us most:

“What luck it is for rulers that men do not think.” – Adolph Hitler

How is it that the enemies of freedom are most attuned to its benefits?

The Freedom Functions

In practice, The Freedom Functions have been related extensively to “The Pillars of Civilization:”

• Cultural Relating → Peace
• Participative Governance → Participation
• Free Enterprise → Prosperity

In cryptic summary, we may demonstrate how “The Historical America” has met these conditions:

• Nearly one century and one-half of Peace between and among its states (Take that, Europe!).
• The first and really only constitutionally-mandated citizens as policy-makers in the history of civilization.
• The most robust economy in world history, leading the “Tsunami Wave” of socioeconomic growth for the world as well as its own individual states over the last five decades.

The Freedom Scores

How is it, then, that the candidates for president in 2008 have not even mentioned these empirically-demonstrated ingredients?

The closest these candidates have come to discussing Cultural Relating is “building walls to keep our neighbors out” (Republican) versus embracing “amnesty” and committing one million tax dollars over the lifetime of the family (Democrats).

Do I hear anybody considering the possibility of Free Enterprise Zones along the border, attracting the ambitious workers from the South and the committed entrepreneurs from the North?

No!

The closest the candidates have come to discussing Participative Governance is “taxing the rich” (Democrats) against “taxing the poor” (Republicans), all the while “tapping” their Political Action Committees funded by the Multinational Corporations.

Do I hear anybody discussing the elevation and acceleration of Education, Empowerment, and Economics for “We the People?”

No!

The closest the candidates have come to considering Entrepreneurial Enterprise is to consider H.R. 1908, dedicated to rendering American entrepreneurs, the source of over 80 percent of our innovation, impotent by replacing “First to Invent” with “First to File” and “Most to Spend.”

Do I hear anybody discuss building upon Entrepreneurism, America’s historically “Secret Engine” in the Free Enterprise Marketplace?

No!

If you have not heard these or similar proposals, then you will rate the candidates as “Zeroes” on their Freedom Scores: Zeroes for their knowledge on America’s effective ingredients; Zeroes for their performance in “Spinning the Sham” or “Baiting the Switch!”

“Zeroes”—that’s what we rated them.

Sample Scores

If you think you heard something relevant from the candidates, or inferred something relevant, or just happen to like the guy or gal, then consider the illustrations in Table 4. As may be noted, only one illustration is indicated at each level of every scale. Generative illustrations are potentially infinite.

For example, we have not heard of Prosperity Border States and Enterprise Zones, let alone Building Bridges. Yet these offer exponentially more promise for relating, governing, and wealth-generating for ourselves and our neighbors. Good fences did not make good neighbors, not even in Robert Frost’s New England where it preceded the genocide of the American Indians by the crazed and monolithic Puritans!

Since Ross Perot, we have not been reminded of Electronic Town Meetings with Enlightened Citizens Empowered on Issues, let alone educating students by something other than “Every Child Left Behind” memorization systems. Oh, yes, there is a benefit to learning English, “by far the most operational language for science and technology” (check the Nobel Prizes—you have to live in America or work with Americans if you want to learn to think generatively).

The R & D that drove the American Capitalistic system has been abandoned, along with the generativity of the Xerox Learning Center from which all the alleged IT innovators stole their variations of binary function processing. Is R & D coming back?

As Zhu Min, general manager of the state-owned Bank of China suggests: “Manufacturing is gone; services are going; research and development is still there. The U.S. needs to move up the development chain.” (Do not blame the messenger: “Steal once, blame you. Steal twice, blame me!”)

Table 4. Sample Ratings of Unexplored Political Issues

Also to be considered in rating levels of behavior is the mode by which the candidates arrive at their proposals. For example, First Lady Hillary Clinton did an authoritarian “Give and Go” (absent many of the organizations and people affecting or affected by health care) for her Healthcare Plan before her husband’s first administration.

The following categories have “dysfunctional autonomy:” they simply do not relate to the effective ingredients of American Civilization. Indeed, because they are incomplete based upon “differences” rather than “similarities,” they have all been “depressor variables” for our brief 230+ year history: that means that, like the current administration’s “War Presidency,” they contribute only to the retrogression of the ingredients that make a true difference in American Civilization. What follows is a comprehensive picture of candidacy; you may wish to consider a partial list of twelve crudely formulated issues that are “historical depressor variables” for the great civilization that this country could become:

• Bureaucracy!
• Class and caste!
• Ego!
• Ethnicity!
• Demographics!
• Grades!
• Identity!
• Idiosyncracy!
• Intelligence Quotient!
• Race!
• Religion!
• Sexual Orientation!

These are not the dimensions that made America great! Judging by the candidates’ eagerness to discuss them as issues, they are the dimensions that are currently making America stupid!! And we do not consult our faith as a replacement for using our brainpower!

Indeed, there is a principle to be derived from the current presidential campaign: the time spent on campaign issues is inversely related to their importance for the survival and growth of American Civilization.

The American Experience

The only cultural experiences that make a difference are summed under “The American Experience,” the most powerful formulations that Human Brainpower has made. All other interpretations are “self-serving superstitions.” Those people who go through The American Experience fully, survive and grow. Those who do not, wither and die—intellectually, emotionally, physically! No matter the demographics and other depressor experiences!

Finally, here’s a picture of the issues for 2008. Together, they converge to require a whole new “American Manifesto”—“The Declaration of Interdependence” to accomplish “The Pillars of Civilization:”

• Peace through Cultural Relating
• Participation through Participative Governance
• Prosperity through Entrepreneurial Enterprise

The Third Way

We’re still looking for “The Third Way!”

The real genius of the American capitalistic system has been its entrepreneurial generativity. From our earliest days, we have been driven by the generativity engines of Franklin, Hamilton, and Washington. Entrepreneurial leaders such as Edison, Ford, and Rockefeller defined the core infrastructure of the 20th century—electricity, combustion engines, motor cars, highways, and energy. Tom Watson, Sr., generated the model for “The Golden Age of American Business” in the second half of this 20th century with systems and sales of business machines and computers.

Watson was influenced by John and Frank Patterson, entrepreneurs and founders of the National Cash Register Company or NCR, one of the first modern American companies. He worked his way up to General Sales Manager of the first Sales Training School and introduced the motto “THINK!” which later became the widely-known symbol of International Business Machine or IBM. In so doing, Watson established the “Generative-Innovative Model” for American business.

For thinking people, this means that Generative-driven Innovation is the most powerful positioning in the marketplace. The secrets of the success of this model were the relationships between and among the Watson Center, the Advanced Systems Design, and the Marketing arm; e.g., the relationships between the Generators, Innovators, and Commercializers that we labeled “The GIC System.”

The relationships between the Generators at the Watson Center and the Innovators at Advanced Systems Design were antagonistic. The Generators viewed themselves as the ruling “thinkers” who had no real responsibility for creating the market. The Innovators, in turn, viewed their roles as making the transfers of generative breakthrough ideas into the real world technological needs that create the market. In the vision of the Generator, the Innovators were “Hijackers” of the ideas of others. In the vision of the Innovators, the Generators were “Lords of the Ideal and Peasants of the Real.”

As antagonistic as were the relations between the Generators and Innovators, the relations between Innovators and Commercializers were still more adversarial—nearly violent. Once the Innovators had ownership of technological transfers, they shepherded them like their children. The Marketers, in turn, were interested only in consumer responsiveness: Did the customers embrace the product? Did the customers use the product effectively? The Marketers were tuned-in to the customers, while the Innovators were thrilled with the technology transfers.

It was a simple step from developing the “GIC System—Generators, Innovators and Commercializers” to positioning in the marketplace (Figure 1). IBM positioned itself as “Generative Innovator.” This means that it applied and commercialized the breakthroughs that it generated. Basically, it “owned” the customer base that was increasingly oriented toward immediate innovation with the prospect of long-term generativity.

The real genius of Tom Watson, Sr., was to relate these otherwise mutually exclusive entities into one system—“The GIC System.” Watson defined the “cellular bonding tissue” for the essential secrets of success. Through continuous collaborative and sometimes interdependent processing, the solution to technological crises became the opportunities for generating new technologies.

During the decades of IBM’s “Golden Age”, Watson applied his international trade perspective of ongoing “GIC Relations” to his business: “Internal productivity through operational relatedness!”

Sadly, this principle of relatedness is, itself, no longer in operation!

Figure 1. Generative Innovator Positioning in the Global Market

The issues of globalization, jobs, and education for the 21st century Global Economy converge upon the phases of The GICCA Curve: Generators, Innovators, Commercializers, Commoditizers, Attenuators. Succinctly, America resolved all of these issues in continuous and interdependent processing for a bountiful and expanding future with “GIC Systems.”

• Generative or “breakthrough” research by the likes of IBM’s Watson Center, AT&T Bell Labs, and Xerox Learning Center;
• Innovative contextual “transfers” of these breakthroughs by laboratory-based industries such as Microsoft and Intel;
• Commercial applications of these innovations by consumer-responsive businesses such as General Electric and Westinghouse.

These “GIC Systems” sustained and grew the American economy throughout the second half of the 20th century. In this context, the U.S. was the hope—not only for its economy—but for the economies of the world: if things work here, they can work anywhere!

It is axiomatic that the “breakthroughs” of one generation often become the “depressor variables” of the next generation. In other words, the generative thinking that got us “outside the box” then serves to put us “inside the box” now.

This is the case with our thinking based on the “Binary Function” of the adherents of Information Technology or IT. What was an asset for America’s leadership in generating the “Tsunami of Socioeconomic Growth” over the last half of the 20th century has become the deficit of America’s generative leadership in the marketplace.

What makes the “Binary Function” problematic is not its contributions to the marketplace. The “branching systems” it has discriminated have produced an incredible array of products and services, culminating in a multi-trillion dollar global IT business phenomenon.

What makes the “Binary Function” a “depressor variable” is its impact on American leadership in the global marketplace. Our retreat to lower-order, “pedestrian processing” has made discriminative learning available to everyone and transformed America’s generative leadership into “also-ran, back-in-the-pack” positioning in the 21st century marketplace.

For thinking people, this means retreat to Innovative Commercializer positioning. Unfortunately, the historical “GIC Relationships,” Generator, Innovator, Commercializer relationships, no longer exist. This is due in large part to the American business reaction to the Japanese “blind-siding” of the 1980s and the Chinese “blind imitation” in the 2000s. In order to defeat imitating, American businesses retreated from generating to innovating. There are no longer any R & D centers of any consequence: there is little scientific search, let alone any research, to explicate the unknown; only developmental trials and focus groups to prepare “pilots” for commercialization.

Moreover, by abdicating systematic “GIC” leadership, the U.S.A. has slowed world Generativity down to a random trickle. Not only has the U.S. suffered from short-term stasis, but the nations of the world will now suffer from long-term paralysis as the wheels of Generativity grind to a halt. Concurrently, both leader and followers are surrendering to Multinational Corporations that sponsor no Generativity and have no alignment with American Civilization other than capitalistic profitability.

Indeed, the Multinational Corporations have dropped the “R” in “R&D.” For them, Generativity is a huge expense that places burdens upon dividends to stockholders. They assume no social responsibility and are dedicated only to development which translates directly into capitalistic profitability.

In this context, the Multinational Corporations are “dead-set enemies” of the Entrepreneurial-Driven Capitalism of the Watson era. To be sure, they have adopted the philosophy of Microsoft, Inc. and its leaders: “The only thing that we are afraid of is two guys in a garage.” (Think, Wright Brothers!) Accordingly, they have huge staffs of scientists and engineers scouring the garages of the world to discover the Generators who might create new markets and the Innovators who might create new “playing fields” for the applications and transfers of technologies.

All Asian countries aspire to the Innovative Commercializer Positioning in the marketplace (see Figure 2). In this positioning, Innovative Initiatives are “nested” in the Commercializer Phase. This is the positioning which Multinational Corporations find most profitable and, therefore, most attractive: it emphasizes legacy contributions modified or customized by innovative technological initiatives.

Figure 2. The Innovative Commercializer Positioning in the Global Market

This is “The Microsoft Model:” to appear “slightly innovative” while becoming maximally profitable. The long-term problem is that this apparently “risk-free” course is very vulnerable to both Generators and Innovators as when the U.S. retaliated against Japan, Inc. for “dumping” in the 1990s by pitting “True Innovation versus False Imitation.”

Most important, America has abandoned the source of its dominance throughout the 20th century: “Free Enterprise through Generative Innovation!” Historically, we have dominated by generating R & D “breakthroughs” and discovering new markets and servicing them.

It is uncomfortable for a nation of builders to work for Multinationals that chant “Second to the market and proud of it.”

We are a people who are committed to the front of the market curve: “First to the market and free!”

In transition, American Free Enterprise has dropped from its pre-potent leadership of Generative Innovation to a “Slightly Innovative Commercializer Positioning” which places her “back-in-the-pack” with all of the other “Wannabe Commercializers.” The U.S. has done this in large part due to her deference to the Multinational Corporations which satisfy stockholder demands on profitability and fail on creative leadership values.

The thesis of our work has been simple:

1. Research the effective ingredients of Freedom.
2. Rate the presidential candidates on their positions on Freedom.
3. Design the model to save the country that is in danger of losing her Freedoms.

Regarding the effective ingredients of freedom, we have found them to be robustly related to “The Pillars of Civilization:”

• Cultural Relating → Peace
• Participative Governance → Participation
• Entrepreneurial Enterprise → Prosperity

Regarding the freedom ratings of the candidates related to Peace, Participation, and Prosperity, there are none:

• “Zeroes!”

No further commentary is needed!

We do not have a Thinking President!

We do not have Thinking Candidates!

Regarding the design of our “Freedom Model,” we offer the following substantive dimensions of “The Free Enterprise Model” (see Figure 3):

• Entrepreneurial Enterprise,
• Enlightened Citizenry,
• Interdependent Relating.

Deductively-modeled, the Policy-Making Cell that is dedicated to positioning in the Global Marketplace is “The 5-5-5- Cell.” This is where enlightened Policy Markers generate the conditions that ensure “The Pillars of Prosperity.” Of course, there are requirements for Generative Processing Systems as well as Continuous Organizational Realignment Systems dedicated to accomplishing the Entrepreneurial Enterprise, Participative Governance, and Cultural Relating goals.

Figure 3. The Free Enterprise Model

Summary and Transition

In summary, the Free Enterprise Model ensures achieving, once again, global leadership in “The Pillars of Civilization:” Peace, Participation, Prosperity.

In this instance, we dedicated our functions to The Free Enterprise Mission:

Prosperity functions are achieved by participation components enabled by peaceful relating processes.

In turn, this “The Freedom Mission” may be rotated for the different civilized functions of Peace and Participation.

For thinking people, this means our historic successes are exceeded only by our current failures in freedom-building. Building upon the fundamental assumption that governments derive “their Just Powers from the Consent of the Governed,” our Declaration of Independence dedicated our governance to the achievement of growth “ideals” for its people.

With this foundation, We the People created a Constitution to pursue Life, Liberty, Safety, and Happiness. Over the course of a little over 200 years, We the People have built the greatest nation in the history of the world, The United States of America:

• Its 50 states, some of them larger than most countries, have lived together peacefully and productively over nearly 150 years, thus reflecting the freest political system ever known.
• Among its 50 states, the GDPs of several number among the top 30 countries in the world, thus reflecting the freest and most wealth-generating system in the history of the world.
• Perhaps most important, the citizens of its 50 states have been designated by the Constitution as the policymakers of the freest representative democratic governance in the history of the world.

So what’s the problem? The U.S. has truly demonstrated itself to be The Great Experiment—nay, The Greatest Experiment in the history of humankind.

We reached from the “real” to the “ideal.” We climbed the highest mountains in the history of civilization. We viewed the “peaks” ahead of us. Then we retreated!

The problem is that we are now abusing the very truths we have established.

1. We the People have erected the most culturally related society ever, both within our national boundaries and between ourselves and other nations, even enemies—witness the collaborative Hoover Plan after World War I and the Marshall and MacArthur Plans after World War II.

   The First Problem, then, is This: We the People no longer collaborate culturally. We the People compete independently!

2. We the People have erected the most productive and profitable economic system ever, both within our borders and between and among those of the rest of the world—witness the continuing initiatives to generate Free Enterprise Trade Relationships throughout the world.

   The Second Problem, then, is This: We the People no longer sponsor entrepreneurially-driven Free Enterprise! We the People, now support the totalitarian command-and-control market systems of Global Multinational Corporations, corporations which have no loyalty to the American freedoms that bore them.

3. We the People have erected the most representative democratic governance system ever—witness the historic flow of democratic changes within and between generations of our representatives and administrations.

   The Third Problem, then, is This: We the People are no longer the policy-makers our Constitution empowered. We the People have been reduced to the dependent minions of the authoritarian edicts of our now-evolving “Chain-of-Command Society.”

On these dimensions alone, We the People—We the Policy-Makers—have failed to elect leaders who serve the “ideals” that ensure our Life, Liberty, Safety, and Happiness. Indeed, we have elected representatives who have intentionally undermined these ideals in our time.

We simply cannot raise generations of people with First World Freedoms, and treat them with Third World Tyranny.

On this topic, The Declaration of Independence has its own recommendations:

But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Objective, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

In 1776, The Declaration of Independence told us this: “If you don’t like it, fix it!” This admonition still stands today.

We the People have yet to speak!

Perhaps the most powerful illustration of “Reasoning with Images” occurred in the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman in the late 1930s and early 1940s. In this case, it was not so much their direct thinking as what these appointed executives set into motion.

“The Manhattan Project” was a great undertaking which, if successful, could set the world free of tyranny and totalitarianism. Stimulated by initiatives of Baruch and Einstein, the project was dedicated to beating the Axis Powers, initially Germany and ultimately Japan, in a race “to explode the atomic bomb.” All manner of explosives scientists and technologists were engaged. Indeed, all manner of experts were engaged—unsuccessfully, we must add!

It was not successful until Robert Oppenheimer, director of the project, was approached by a marginal junior scientist who suggested the following: “We must learn to implode the atomic bomb!” Because Oppenheimer was a Talmudic scholar, he was able to reconsider the methodology of the mission.

“The Manhattan Project” took a “U-Turn” in the road. The world was made safe for cultural relating, participative governance, and entrepreneurial enterprise. We are once again at such crossroads!

For thinking people, this means that the current model of American Enterprise must once again implement Generative Innovator positioning.

The march of civilization is the march of freedom. Free enterprise has brought us entrepreneurial capitalism and free markets. Participative governance has given us democratic governments and individual rights. Cultural relating has yielded human rights, meritocracy and social security. The human benefits are awesome to calculate.

And yet the march of civilization is not without costs to its promulgators. The treatment of the U.S. in the global marketplace is consistent with the adage, “No good deed goes unpunished!” Until the 21st century, America has been the source of more than 90% of the generative breakthroughs in science and the innovative variations in technologies. Still, its citizens are not the beneficiaries of their intellectual processing.

Take the case of Intel’s $2.5 billion semiconductor chip fabrication plant being built in China. “Innovated in America—Commercialized Elsewhere!” is the new trade paradigm. There are as many possible manipulations to ensure the benefits of creativity as there are criminal machinations to steal intellectual property. But there is only one enduring leadership paradigm: Generativity! This is the fuel for “The Roadmap to Freedom.”

American Enterprise leads in the GICCA Marketplace. In other terms, Generativity drives Free Enterprise Economics, requires Free Participative Governance, and is enabled by Interdependent Cultural Relating.

Figure 4. The American Enterprise Model in the Global Marketplace

If we generate entrepreneurially, we can drive markets commercially. This means that we are continuously changing the marketing paradigm and the playing field on which it is enacted. Remember, Generators are aligned with change! We can “Reverse any ‘U-Turn’.”

In order to continue to exercise Generative Leadership, we must follow the “Roadmap to the Freedom Functions—Peace, Participation, Prosperity.

• Interdependently-driven Cultural Relating to generate Peace;
• Electronically-driven Participative Governance to generate Participation;
• Entrepreneurial-driven Free Enterprise to generate Prosperity.

The cost of “The Roadmap to Freedom” is high: Continuous Generative Processing for Continuous Peace, Participation, and Prosperity requires “Skilled, Generative, Thinking People.”

Our “Voyage of Discovery” has yielded our roadmap.

Our “Human Brainpower” will implement it.

We can create our own “Changeable Destinies.”

Freedom is thinking—Generative Thinking!