No, This is Not Really a 21st Century Campaign

by: Matt Stoller

Mon Jun 23, 2008 at 17:50


I spent some time at the Personal Democracy Forum with a man named Tom Steinberg who runs MySociety in England.  MySociety can be best described as a civic engagement engine, and has a suite of websites that have attracted more than 10% of the country to interact with their government.  This includes a petition site for 10 Downing Street, a site called FixMyStreet which is exactly what it sounds like, and a site that lists information and allows interaction with MPs.  

Tom is a brilliant constitutional visionary, who communicates in very simple and humble terms about a new theory of democracy.  This theory can best be described as 'people should have stuff to do in between elections'.  In analyzing this campaign cycle, he said something that stuck with me, and that is that all of the money that is being raised and all of the volunteer energy that is being deployed is being used to communicate with citizens by television ads, direct mail, radio and phone calls.

Essentially, the internet this cycle is driving the traditional campaign machinery, only faster and perhaps a bit more micro-targeted.  As an example, the phone banking tools that Obama is using so effectively were also deployed by the Clinton campaign, as are the same basic fundraising tools.  And while 6% of the country has given money this cycle, fully 44% of the voting population of this country has contacted their member of Congress in the last five years.  That's a huge participation gap between campaign activism and civic activism, at all levels.

I'm going to guess that a good amount of 21st century campaigning will look like the 19th century, with a politicized business community, much stronger local political machines, and engagement levels at 80% or 90%.  Local debating societies, nonprofits that do service work and voter turnout, and a blurred line between government and politics are probably in the cards.  As social media and public spaces increase in importance in our culture, they will dominate our politics.  Right now, internet campaigns take people who like public spaces, harvest their time and money, and use it to target those who want consumer politics.  What happens when politics takes place entirely in social public spaces?
Matt Stoller :: No, This is Not Really a 21st Century Campaign

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
No, This is Not Really a 21st Century Campaign | 15 comments
Sources? (4.00 / 1)
Could I please see sources for the 6% and 44% numbers?  These both seem very high to me.  1.5 million Obama donors / ~300 million Americans = 0.5%.  I'd be very happy for my intuition to fail me on this.   Interesting post - thanks.
it does seem high (0.00 / 0)
Although I suppose all those Congressional and local donors might add up.  A lot of businesses feel obligated.  

I suppose we need to exclude people under 18 (about 25%) who are barred from donating, which would help.  

So that means we'd need 13.5 million unique donors to make it to 6%.  An average donation of $100 would imply over $1 billion raised already.

On further reflection, I doubt very much anyone could know.  Since donors who give small amounts are not publicly disclosed, they could easily be counted multiple times if anyone just adds them up.  On the other hand, if you ask people if they donate in a poll, I doubt the answer is very reliable (just as, for example, Church attendance is overstated.)



New Jersey politics at Blue Jersey.

[ Parent ]
IIRC Minors (under 18) can contribute (0.00 / 0)
but the funds have to actually belong to them, and not just be a pass through for a parent or other adult - i.e. they had to have possession of the funds a reasonable amount of time before the donation, or has recently have gained them through earnings.
[ Parent ]
The Public Square (0.00 / 0)
Interesting thoughts.  I'm of the mind that we're coming up on a social and economic shift that will realign toward local spaces and community and will lead to a resurgence in local communities and human connection--i.e. we're actually going to know our neighbors again, though the specific definition of "neighbor" will likely become more geographically broad and diverse.

We're going to move away from globalization and toward localization.  Which means that politics will be effected.  It leads to the question, perhaps, of whether or not we will start to become more focused on local representation as well as the question of whether or not local representation will start to gain more power.  I wonder if we might see a bit of a shift away from federalized power toward a more localized concentration of power--not just on the state levels, but on the county and city levels.

It might also raise the question of whether or not we'll see a considerable expansion of the House in the next decade or two.  It won't be easy to upend the status quo, but if there is a significant and influential localization movement, there could be a corollary movement for tightened, more localized federal representation, leading to a significant expansion of the 435 House seats.

In other words, I think you may be on to something with the notion of 21st century politics being a bit like 19th century politics.  Sounds pretty good to me.

Doing stuff between elections...MoveOn? (4.00 / 1)
I think MoveOn is starting to fill this sphere. Not only does MoveOn keep us active between elections--rallies, lobbying congress etc. but it doing its part to build a public/online sphere:

http://pol.moveon.org/virtualm...
(I am in Ohio 15--202 calls not too shabby)
http://pol.moveon.org/townhall...

There is something to be said for those type of public events which take place both on the ground and online.

Did they talk about MoveOn at all?



We won the Battle. Now the Real Fight for Change Begins. Join MoveOn.org and fight for progressive change.  

I like your term "civic engagement engine" (0.00 / 0)
In terms of citizen-involvement vs. consumer politics, I see Obama's campaign as a transitional one.  The same will apply to his presidency.  One area where the netroots should work with him and also lead/push him is his still-vague ideas for using the Internet to open up government to efficient citizen review, input, dialog and influence.

If it goes well, this democratizing trend in the federal government will dovetail in mutually beneficial ways with more local, bottoms-up, community-centric developments that encompass both electronic and in-person activities and interactions, and both local government and non-government entities.

The toolkit, power and scope of the netroots should be able to expand pretty dramatically during an Obama administration, and a key part of its role will be to keep him honest and on track in terms of "re-forming" government-citizen relationships.

One of the virtues of broadband Internet connectivity is that it creates channels for productive linkages between local, national and global organizations, ideas and initiatives.  I've been reading lately about the various and near-overwhelming problems we face as a country and a planet.  My sense is that addressing them in ways that are even close to sufficient to avoid catastrophic suffering will require very fundamental changes in how our political and economic systems function, and that a key part of this will be strong, productive, responsive, resilient, dynamically adaptive and constantly evolving local-global linkages, including access to power-leveraging points at various levels of government.

The future of political campaigns may in fact resemble 19th century campaigns in key respects, as you suggest.  But future political activity will also be unique and uniquely powerful in that it will have the functionality and connectivity of the global Internet at its core and at its disposal.  Increasingly, we'll need to think AND act locally AND globally, and will have the ability to do so, and to help and encourage others to do the same, whether they are our neighbor or live on the other side of the world.

Building Communities (4.00 / 2)
I think that it's important to remember the kind of work that Living Liberally is doing in the "people should have stuff to do between elections" mission.

Making politics and policy an important part of our cultural activities is vital to increasing political engagement between election cycles.

The idea that because politics has an important effect on your daily life, it should have a place in the activities of your daily life is an effective way of looking at the situation and drawing more people into politics and political discussion through events that they are more comfortable with.

Agreed . . . and another example (0.00 / 0)
Living Liberally is the perfect example of the model.  In that same realm, our organization - Democrats Work - does similar work in the community service space.  Our aim is to keep Democrats active and engaged when it is not election time by connecting volunteers with visibile, tangible community service projects year-round - cleaning up neighborhoods and parks, planting trees, painting houses for the elderly, supporting veterans, etc.

Come election time, we have built an expanded and easily mobilized volunteer force that can help with voter turnout.  Matt mentioned "nonprofits that do service work and voter turnout," which is exactly what Democrats Work is doing.

Another way of looking at this model is as a blend of the activist and consumer models of political engagement: for the activist, this is an opportunity to put his or her values into action throughout the year - both through service and through traditional political engagement; for the consumer, we demonstrate that Democrats are getting things done and that we're the people you can turn to if there is a need in your community - which, one hopes, will be just as powerful a message as anything they see on TV, in the mail, or on their doorsteps in November.    

[ Parent ]
Direct Democracy by Delegable Proxy. (0.00 / 0)
I believe that one piece will eventually be "Direct Democracy by Delegable Proxy" along the lines described by James Green-Armytage here.

A major piece is the the verification of people. Bruce Schneier pointed out Credentica as filling such a need. Recently their site suggested possibilities but has since been bought by Microsoft. To bad Google didn't buy it, or ideally really the government. The descriptions of how it would work are still there.

I see activists in the middle layers of such a system as mediators between more and less ordinary voters and professional politicians. It's a missing link in social networking sites today.

Jeff Wegerson - Prairie State Blue

Professional politicians (0.00 / 0)
I've often wondered how we might re-incentivize institutions like the congress to utilize their resources to more effectively present the pros and cons of any given issue; to more fully embrace the idea that they should research and investigate policy options and hold informed public debates that might actually inform the public.

Perhaps in a more direct democracy these professional politicians might be made in something more like a professional debating club.  They present the arguments and the citizens vote (proxy, or direct) based on those arguments.  As the results of the policies enacted become more apparent, the citizens can now approach an election by analyzing how accurate their congress persons are and how well-informed their arguments were.  In the ideal, the congress will have become a place where finding solid evidence and presenting an accurate argument will become the means to get re-elected.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
A great peice (0.00 / 0)
Though I think we are actually going further back than just the 19th century (ie to the age of the pamphlets)

The media monopoly of the last 50 years was a product of high barriers to entry resulting from the enourmous capital costs required by television.  It seems obvious that this barrier to entry has collapsed.

There are two words that interest me in politics right now: collaboration and entrepreneurship.

Campaigns have been very top down affairs in the last 50 years.  Activists all over the country can all probably tell the story of the local campaign run by activists who find themselves marginalized by the arrival of the professionals (who then in turn screw things up.  See the 2002 Fla Gov race, for eg).  So what is desperately needed is to  change the fundemental relationship between the center and the grass roots.  

As someone who spends a good deal of the professional life trying to get people to collaborate in a private setting, I have been profoundly impressed by the Obama Campaign's ability to create what appears to be a collobarative environment.  The Obama campaign also seems to enabled an entrepreneurial environment where activists have been encouraged to take the lead in local organizing.  

The Obama Campaign's accomplishments in this area are enourmously significant.  

Dispersive Democracy (4.00 / 1)
As Jeff Wegerson says, all the tools are now in place for a direct democracy. It is only a matter of time (hopefully we will have enough) until people start demanding their own say in political affairs.

I am currently studying for an MA in Political Theory and I hope to do a PhD focusing upon a model that might be workable. The primary reason being that I am certain that the representative method is destined to be superceded and that it is a good idea to look at the alternatives before that happens.
As part of that, I will have to unequivocally reject the idea of delegable proxies. Why? Because it discourages people from deliberating and ascertaining their own positions on an issue. The very reason for their invocation - that citizens have no time to learn about every issue - means they cannot accurately evaluate others' positions either. This is a recipe for demagoguery and a continuation of the very problems that plague representation at the moment. No-one can make anyone else's decisions for them. It is not only a denial of that which makes us fundamentally human - our capacity for reasoned action - it also leads to behaviours that are detrimental to honest debate such as an excessive loyalty by the representative on behalf of the represented, leading to an inherent lack of generosity towards the unrepresented.

Anyone wishing to further discuss these issues, please head over to http://un-representativedemocr... where I have just begun to lay out my own dispersive democratic vision. Any alternative perspectives will be much appreciated!!

I take it that you meant your comment as a rebly to my comment. (4.00 / 1)
I may be wrong and you mean this as a new comment, but for the moment I assume that you are not aware of the nested comment reply feature of this software.

In any case, good luck on your dissertation. From your comment and your two postings at your website, I take away that I would place you in my personal category of idealist anarchist. Indeed I just recently reread Ursala LeGuin's The Dispossessed. I recommend it to you.

Here's what I like about delegable proxy. It's four features actually. One that there is the potential to have more than a single representative; two that your representatives are real time, meaning that you can change them at will; three that you can always vote directly and override your representative at anytime; and four that my vote your cascade upwards as your representative may have a representative who represents you as well. You do understand all that when you argue against delegable proxy, right?

Your arguments against delegable proxy are reasonable and worth concern. And perhaps delegable proxy is an intermediate step between some approach you support and what exists now.

But since we are both talking progressive ideals, we both need to recognize that we would be changing from an oligarchic plutocracy; not an easy change.

Anyway, good luck again with your dissertation.  

Jeff Wegerson - Prairie State Blue

[ Parent ]
Thanks! (4.00 / 1)
Sorry, I'm not sure if I've ever posted here before, but if I did it was a long time ago, so I screwed up replying to you.
Cheers for the recommendation as well - I'll go and check it out, I love Ursula LeGuin anyway, and that's not one I've come across. Though the amount of university reading is kind of cutting in to my free time at the moment!
You're right about the difficulty of the change as well - perhaps a delegable proxy system would make for an easier shift, I guess; I hadn't considered it in that light. I found the site that you linked to earlier a couple of years ago and had thought the idea has its merits, it reminds me of Guild Socialism, or possibly associative forms of democracy in its representation by issue rather than territory.
Still, I'm convinced that representation isn't tenable in the long term - not with Open-source forms of organisation acting as guide.
I've gotta go but got more to discuss, so I'll be back!
[ Parent ]
Not a campaign: e-democracy (0.00 / 0)
Matt, thanks for the interesting post on MySociety. I think what you're getting at here is the e-democracy aspect of e-government. Unfortunately much of the work applying the Internet to government problems has been in a client-services model, not in an e-democracy model. IE, governments spend considerable money to build online forms that provide one-to-one service, but neglect engaging people in democratic processes or involving them in decision-making or governance.

The UK has been a global leader in exploring how government can foster e-democracy, sinking some serious money into the problem. Local government units even hired the Minnesota-based e-democracy.org to set up community websites for them with government funds.
http://e-democracy.org/uk/

For my part I am interested in how technology can be applied to urban planning, one of the areas were participation is most important since the field is already committed to involving the public. I think the biggest barriers are technical literacy and appropriate technical tools.
http://goodspeedupdate.com/200...

In addition to MySociety, the British company LimeHouse has an interesting platform, and is signing up lots of U.S. clients ...

No, This is Not Really a 21st Century Campaign | 15 comments
Donate to Open Left









QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.

blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox