I do appreciate your Responses.

The point I meant to make is not about how laws get made, but judging their validity. No matter who or how, if people are judging laws their judgement will be in some sense arbitrary. So we might as well let any law stand that does not compromise the democratic political process (because that is the basis for a just representative form of government).

I agree that there is something somewhat postmodernish about it, but as far as I know postmodernists would reject any thought concerning what justice must be, much less how it relates to the political process, much less how to employ justice in judging the validity of laws.

To be honest, in that article I sort of started out writing one thing and ended up with a slightly different focal point. In this nation, though, people do think in terms of judging the constitutionality of laws, not whether they are just or not. So the idea of ending constitutional review of laws would leave us with letting all laws stand (that don't compromise...).

I do also think that using the popular vote to elect representatives and senators and the president is more just than involving geography is. At the same time, I do favor a general decentralization of power.