Dont believe that any mechanical system of counting votes or republican representation can fix what is broken. The US has to find a unifying social consensus first, then it systems can implement and reflect that. The question is how do we find this new social consensus, a set of priorities which provide a compass to light our path. It used to be enlightenment liberalism supported by Christian values. The unique and revolutionary feature of American thought that put the highest possible value on the dignity and value of the individual, in the face of the impassioned masses, can be rejuvenated, and perhaps might light our way forward again. We can always hope.
Yes, agreed, we can always hope. You hit the bull-eyes with this: "It used to be enlightenment liberalism supported by Christian values." How do we build back to that––or forward? Not sure. In the meantime, keep the damn demagogues out the the White House. It's a strategy of success while we wait to see what culture and politics (and social consensus) are going to do . . . It is all very fascinating while also being worrisome for the children.
Any system of nominating is vulnerable to bad intentions and undesirable outcomes. Before primaries, nominations came from party leaders meeting in "smoke-filled rooms." That system produced Lincoln and Roosevelt. A more majoritarian system is vulnerable to an effective demagogue, especially at times of economic or international stress.
There are any number of villains in the present sorry state of democracy -- the decline of the media; resurgent racism; a culture of selfishness going back to Reagan and Ayn Rand; Citizens United from the Supreme Court; the Kochs' sponsorship of authoritarian, right wing candidates, think tanks, and political movements. The Constitution itself, with the unrepresentative Senate and electoral college, and with the inbuilt bias favoring states and implicit racism -- all contribute to the vulnerability of democracy.
Hello Richard. Agreed on all fronts. However, there is only one institution in American democracy today that 1) can be easily reformed and 2) can easily stop the rise of a demagogue to the White House. Only one: political parties. They have the power, if they wish to recover it, to take charge of who they are, what their platforms and policies are, and––life and death for a democracy––who they elevate as candidate for president. We took a wrong turn in tying their hands behind their backs in the reforms of late 1960s and early 1970s. Trump has proved it, with blood splattered on the Capitol walls. Responsibility spreads across the land, as you say. What matters is not being fair-minded about complex causation. What matters is finding viable solutions. That is why I am focussed on reform of the presidential nominating system. It's a viable solution . . . one day. Best,
Dont believe that any mechanical system of counting votes or republican representation can fix what is broken. The US has to find a unifying social consensus first, then it systems can implement and reflect that. The question is how do we find this new social consensus, a set of priorities which provide a compass to light our path. It used to be enlightenment liberalism supported by Christian values. The unique and revolutionary feature of American thought that put the highest possible value on the dignity and value of the individual, in the face of the impassioned masses, can be rejuvenated, and perhaps might light our way forward again. We can always hope.
Yes, agreed, we can always hope. You hit the bull-eyes with this: "It used to be enlightenment liberalism supported by Christian values." How do we build back to that––or forward? Not sure. In the meantime, keep the damn demagogues out the the White House. It's a strategy of success while we wait to see what culture and politics (and social consensus) are going to do . . . It is all very fascinating while also being worrisome for the children.
We must adopt a ranked election primary such as Alaska uses. And then we must eliminate the Electoral College in favor of direct election.
Agreed. Both are fantastic steps in the right direction.
Any system of nominating is vulnerable to bad intentions and undesirable outcomes. Before primaries, nominations came from party leaders meeting in "smoke-filled rooms." That system produced Lincoln and Roosevelt. A more majoritarian system is vulnerable to an effective demagogue, especially at times of economic or international stress.
There are any number of villains in the present sorry state of democracy -- the decline of the media; resurgent racism; a culture of selfishness going back to Reagan and Ayn Rand; Citizens United from the Supreme Court; the Kochs' sponsorship of authoritarian, right wing candidates, think tanks, and political movements. The Constitution itself, with the unrepresentative Senate and electoral college, and with the inbuilt bias favoring states and implicit racism -- all contribute to the vulnerability of democracy.
Eli Merritt
Feb 18
Author
Hello Richard. Agreed on all fronts. However, there is only one institution in American democracy today that 1) can be easily reformed and 2) can easily stop the rise of a demagogue to the White House. Only one: political parties. They have the power, if they wish to recover it, to take charge of who they are, what their platforms and policies are, and––life and death for a democracy––who they elevate as candidate for president. We took a wrong turn in tying their hands behind their backs in the reforms of late 1960s and early 1970s. Trump has proved it, with blood splattered on the Capitol walls. Responsibility spreads across the land, as you say. What matters is not being fair-minded about complex causation. What matters is finding viable solutions. That is why I am focussed on reform of the presidential nominating system. It's a viable solution . . . one day. Best,
https://open.substack.com/pub/curly/p/the-republican-national-convention?utm_source=direct&r=3ooz6&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
The Republican National Convention will choose the Republican nominee in 2024, not a plurality of primaries.
Agreed. Both are fantastic steps in the right direction.