Government Re-Form

[Kenneth R.]

Stemming from the disaster threads:

I believe there is a major fault in the binary system of government we now employ. Sure, there is acceptance of other parties, but they are crushed immediately. Given that such a two party system lends itself to voting "against" the candidate one hates more, (or for the optimistic, "for" the one they hate less), the system reduces itself to dirt-slinging. Further, candidates must finance their own campaigns, and in order to remain contenders, this will cost millions, leaving only the rich to run the government. Rich who do not care for the poor because many of them have never known personally what it is to be poor. In addition, the system has lost support by its voters with scandals such as occurred in the Florida national vote recently, and disappointment with results. Candidates seek to obtain the most votes by siding "for" and "against" whatever will attain them the highest numbers, and when selected for office, they sit around and choke on pretzels fullfilling exactly none of their promises. Because less people vote, the candidates hardly care about any of the issues facing their citizens and maintain only enough action to remain in office.

So I propose a change. Myself and several others have come to this idea:

Elections will be random lottery among any citizen eligible to vote and meeting the current requirements for office. These elections will provide 1 citizen participant per state, totalling 50 participants. A lottery winner may decline at this stage and another would be chosen, but with reasonable grounds (such as sickness, age). The 50 participants would then contend directly for office, in a manner similar to American Idol and other TV shows in which, after a round (of debates) one would be voted "off" the island. This process would be free to participants, funded by government funds and revenue from the ratings of its airing on television as a -true- reality TV show. In this way, the public would be pressed to actively participate in choosing their leaders in a more convenient manner. The winner would maintain office for the current set term. Re-election will be allowed, but must run against the new contestants, including the one from own state. Election will be open to both sexes and all races, in the same nondiscriminate manner dictated by current law. Current impeachment laws will still apply should an official prove ineffective.

In this manner, the election belongs in the hands of the people, by the people, and of the people, once again.

thoughts? (If you find this or parts of this to your liking, forward it to as many others, including current congressmen, should you choose).

 

[speed]

thats a pretty extreme idea, although I sort of like it in spirit. It sounds like an american idol version of ancient Greek democracy.

The whole problem with the binary system as you call it, is the logic behind it. Essentially our political system applies the logic of the first political scientist: Aristotle. Thus, following Aristotelian logic, if A is good, then everything A does is good; and B is thus bad, and everything about B is bad. A simple example would be the thoughts of any Democrat or Republican: A Republican believes everything his party is doing is good, and everything his adversary the democrat is doing is bad. Thus, instead of finding common ground, or agreeing on good political ideas, politicians are obsessed about loyalty to their party and its virtues, even if in many cases and bills they pass, this unflinching loyalty is unfounded. Many times the lawyer in these politicians will accept compromise, but it doesnt happen too often. They are more obsessed with their ideology and loyalty to their party than they are to actually examining the propositions and bills their fellow party members are endorsing. If their party is endorsing it, and the other party is not, then it must be by default a good bill; such politicans will fail to realy learn what the bill is really about.

I think our whole society and culture needs to be reformed, but I think the inevitable future economic and social crises will do the job. And if you dont believe they are going to happen, then you are a fool who fails to realize the significance of the terrorist attacks, the decline in household income this year, New Orleans, our massive debt, and trends throughout history and economics.

 

[Kenneth R.]

I think our whole society and culture needs to be reformed, but I think the inevitable future economic and social crises will do the job. And if you dont believe they are going to happen, then you are a fool who fails to realize the significance of the terrorist attacks, the decline in household income this year, New Orleans, our massive debt, and trends throughout history and economics.

couldn't agree more, especially with this last part.

 

[metu]

We have a monumental cultural problem of passing the buck and placing blame which can't be solved with politics. We have racial divisions and animosity between urban and rural communities which can't be solved with politics. We have a general lack of trust, and often fear, of people who live outside of our communities which can't be solved with politics. We have a tendency to read only that with which we agree so that we can intellectually beat down any opposition which can't be solved with politics. We have an addiction to the television which can't be solved with politics.

"You tell me it's the institution, well you know, you'd better free your mind instead." - The Beatles

 

[Kenneth R.]

oh i agree, but why not add politics to the long list of cultural problems?

 

[metu]

You're right. Politics should be debated. But our political situation seems like nothing more than an outgrowth of our society.

For example, with the hurricane, I see the lack of preparedness to be a result of the limited government movement while the bureaucratic bungling of the reaction was a result of the governmental expansion movement. I seems to me that these types of social movements shape politics. But, if political systems is your bag, then that's cool.

Also, I really don't like the idea of giving television more influence in the election process.

 

[Kenneth R.]

you're right, the source of the problem is mainly the society this mess came from, a different one than the society at the time of 1776.

also, you're probably right about TV, a device i now despise, but i see no other way to inform the masses and perhaps open their eyes except through that which they're already addicted to

 

[metu]

I think that we need to inspire a culture of reading. With television, it's too easy to ignore context.

I've thought of a governmental reform which I would like to argue. Fuck the spoils system. Too much of our government changes at the whim of our president. The head of the State Department, the Department of Defense, the Department of the Interior, Department of Education.... This has gotten out of hand. The Presidency means more than it should.

 

[Kenneth R.]

reading should be championed again, i agree. there is much more to learn in books than on television these days.