The Babel Argument - Extension of Structuristics to Political Theory: Semantic Invariance, Population Inertia, and Global Systemic Stability

This paper formalizes an extension of the Structuristics framework (Moura, 2026) to political theory. The central thesis — designated the Babel Argument — holds that the semantic invariance of universal operators in written constitutions is a necessary condition for the detection operator D to function in any constitutionalized political system. A covert reduction of operator scope, introduced without a declared constitutional amendment, constitutes a structural transformation prohibited by CAMAF Axiom 5 and measurably reduces decompositional integrity (ID). Three original contributions are introduced. First, the Epistemic Information Unit (EIU) formalism, which operationalizes ID as a Jaccard-type semantic similarity measure between the original constitutional norm and its operative judicial interpretation. Second, Population Inertia (Iₚ), a variable that explains why systems persist under structural degradation without immediate collapse, and which defines the empirical threshold condition Dₛ · σₑrr > Iₚ for systemic rupture. Third, a global comparative dataset covering nine political systems across distinct regime types, demonstrating that the structural dynamics predicted by the Babel Argument are regime-neutral: they emerge across constitutional systems regardless of whether the system is formally democratic, hybrid, or authoritarian. The Principle of Semantic Invariance (PSI) is formally stated. Six falsifiable empirical predictions are derived. The document complies with CAMAF Standards 1–6. Epistemic status: Author's draft. The core logical argument is held to be structurally sound. Empirical estimates in the comparative dataset are author-estimated hypotheses requiring independent replication. Not reviewed by constitutional law or political theory specialists.