Open Left

The Problem Is Deeper, Though (4.00 / 1)

I really do appreciate how much thought has gone into this. It's a lot more thought than almost anyone else has given to the subject.  Almost too much thought for me to handle in such a short time--in part because I lost almost a full day of work when my keyboard died in ambiguous circumstances (a story best left untold).

You make a very strong case for what's wrong, and why we should move in the direction you propose.  But before plunging into the details, I really felt like I had to address the broader questions of what any sort of political solution can possibly accomplish.  There's a very sobering lesson along similar lines in terms of the history of the initiative in America, which differed dramatically from the original Swiss example.

I bring it up because it, too, was a deep and significant reform, but it was almost entirely coopted by the powers that be, at least in the states where it was used the most.  And yet, the keys to making it work far more effectively were already known, and already existed in the Swiss system, which provided for a much closer integration of the initiative and the ordinary legislative process.  This is the great irony: by recasting the initiative into a superficially seeming "more radical" form, the American proponents ended up creating something that was more easily used to snooker the people, rather than empowering them.

This is why I think we need a broader discussion about the full range of barriers to popular empowerment before focusing more narrowly on the specific details of your proposal.  At first glance, those details look pretty good to me.  But I really want to take things slow, and consider the broadest questions first.

I'd actually like to have an ongoing discussion about this, and maybe you can write an overview introduction diary that I could front-page next weekend as part of that discussion.  As I've indicated, I'm very much in agreement with the spirit of what you're trying to do with this.

"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 12:52:02 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Yes, My Invention is a Work in Progress (4.00 / 2)

that we here at Open Left and in the broader progressive community can move in any direction we wish.

I really appreciate the opportunity you have given us, Paul, to look at it from every angle.

I have been working on it since I thought of it during Dean's run in 2004, and comparing and contrasting it to all other options on the table.

The discussions we have on Open Left, and especially your posts, Paul, are my basic points of reference, together with all the tactics and strategies we have explored and endeavored to implement.

But in light of the obvious fact that we progressives, even though we are an emerging political majority, keep getting shafted by a Democratic Congress and president, I keep coming back to it.

I keep refining it as our other options fail to make the sea-change correction Americans need in order to elect a government that serves their needs instead of those of the special interests, established parties and incumbent elected officials who are running our economy and banking system into the ground.

Yes, I'd be happy to write anything that you think will be helpful and of interest to our Open Left community.

---

by: Nancy Bordier @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 13:41:51 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

I'm Glad You're Willing To Take Me Up On That (4.00 / 1)

I'll get back to you on this by email tomorrow, and we talk about details.

One thought I have is that it really helps democracy to rise from local circumstances.  That's where it's easiest for the largest number of ordinary citizens to become engaged.  Obviously, the greatest long-term benefit is at the national level.  But winning a few more immediate battles is a great way of building enthusiasm.

For example, Los Angeles has a system of Neighborhood Councils that usually work only on local issues, but occasionally band together on city-wide issues.  Your tool might very well help them work more cooperatively together, and that, in turn, could be a real boost for it. But it would have to have content specially tailored for the appropriate sorts of issues.  I know some of the local activists involved in several of these councils, and I think they'd probably be quite open to it.


"Senate passes expanded GI bill despite Bush, McCain opposition"

---

by: Paul Rosenberg @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 13:58:01 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]

Invention Can Be Used by Any Group at Any Level in Any Country (4.00 / 1)

to identify priorities, build consensus about priorities, pressure authorities to implement priorities and, if need be, take over electoral and legislative processes.

It is designed to enable the members of any political group or party to function as sovereign decision-makers for the group or party.

It prevents the electoral chicanery in which group/party leaders and candidates pretend during election campaigns to elicit, respect and follow the wishes of their constituents but sabotage them once the election or vote is over after special interest campaign contributors have bought their votes.

Since the members of the group or party always have their shared agendas, and updates thereof, to use as blueprints and mandates to guide, oversee, instruct and evaluate the performance of their representatives, they can prevent slippage and betrayal by pulling out their agendas and making it clear that they have the power of numbers to throw the betrayers out of office the next time they come up for re-election if they have not exerted their best efforts to enact the agendas into law.

As I write in my book, my invention is designed to restore popular sovereignty in America, given the fact that

The electoral process in the U.S. has been reduced to a legitimizing ritual in which disempowered citizens transfer their sovereignty to electoral candidates who will subsequently use it, once they are elected, to enact their own preferences into law, along with the preferences of the special interests to whom they are beholden.

The act of voting in elections dominated by the anti-democratic rules and practices of the nation's two major parties is an act not of participation in the governing process but an act of relinquishment, a transfer of sovereignty to party-backed electoral candidates who elevate themselves via the electoral process into the inner sanctums of government. There, they translate their own agendas and those of their special interest benefactors into authoritative decisions backed by the power of the state.

My invention is designed to enable self-organizing networks of voters to bring this era to an end.

---

by: Nancy Bordier @ Sun Jul 05, 2009 at 14:34:34 PM CDT

[ Parent | ]