Laying upon the floor kicking one's heels while holding your breath until your face turns red is not compromise. Nor is it suitably adult behavior. I am sadden by this display.
Sunday, October 13, 2013
Monday, October 7, 2013
On Democracy
I had a unique and informative opportunity last week to really see democracy in action, and contrast it with an alternative perspective.
I am a member of an organization that had an annual meeting that includes a session of review, debate, and voting upon a variety of topics. I sat in the audience next to a citizen of the UK and we were able to compare and contrast how the UK version of the same organization would handle the same topics. The open airing of the subject matter, the opportunity for all members to voice their thoughts, and the group voting were energizing and admirable. I was proud to experience true democratic ideals in contrast to the example situations where in the UK the same topics would never be aired or even acknowledged.
In this current environment where the US Congress seems bent on giving the democratic system a bad name, it was in no small way a heart warming experience. On the other hand, at the same time it was also more than a little horrifying.
It was E.B.White who said "Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." I am absolutely convinced that on one or two of the issues discussed in our forum more than half of the people were wrong. Scarily so (IMO) and it required me to explain a couple aspects of current American ('Murican?) society and the visible undercurrents that were perplexing to our visitor. I felt as if I was speaking about that cousin that embarrasses the family at the annual picnic. Correspondingly, I was sadden that these questionable ideas were given equal airing and credence (let alone support by the majority) in the discussion and vote. Certainly, our UK visitor (and I) got to see how there are also some benefits to a process with more executive decision making.
It was completely evident to me that there is no perfect solution. Democracy may, in fact, be the best of the worst. But it has issues, and that cannot be forgotten.
I am a member of an organization that had an annual meeting that includes a session of review, debate, and voting upon a variety of topics. I sat in the audience next to a citizen of the UK and we were able to compare and contrast how the UK version of the same organization would handle the same topics. The open airing of the subject matter, the opportunity for all members to voice their thoughts, and the group voting were energizing and admirable. I was proud to experience true democratic ideals in contrast to the example situations where in the UK the same topics would never be aired or even acknowledged.
In this current environment where the US Congress seems bent on giving the democratic system a bad name, it was in no small way a heart warming experience. On the other hand, at the same time it was also more than a little horrifying.
It was E.B.White who said "Democracy is the recurrent suspicion that more than half of the people are right more than half of the time." I am absolutely convinced that on one or two of the issues discussed in our forum more than half of the people were wrong. Scarily so (IMO) and it required me to explain a couple aspects of current American ('Murican?) society and the visible undercurrents that were perplexing to our visitor. I felt as if I was speaking about that cousin that embarrasses the family at the annual picnic. Correspondingly, I was sadden that these questionable ideas were given equal airing and credence (let alone support by the majority) in the discussion and vote. Certainly, our UK visitor (and I) got to see how there are also some benefits to a process with more executive decision making.
It was completely evident to me that there is no perfect solution. Democracy may, in fact, be the best of the worst. But it has issues, and that cannot be forgotten.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
The Decline, and Hopefully Fall, of the Two Party System
By and large within the United States politics has adhered to a two party system. We warp a mutating and diverse matrix of issues and goals into two camps over and over again through the years. This was more successful when the country was smaller - lesser population, less diversity, fewer issues, less complex economy, etc., etc. In today's web of issues, the two party system seems to be getting weighted down and frozen as it tries to keep to the staid behavior of the past. But habit and tradition cannot free us from the expectation of two meaningful parties and a bunch of fringe humor candidates.
Look at the current drama of the government 'shutdown'. The Republican Party is being held politically captive by a faction which is essentially a third party within it, 'The Tea Party'. We even call it a party, but keep it lumped within the accepted grouping because we cannot allow them to stand on their own.
There is a lot of dialogue and 'podium thumping' at home and on the internet about 'failures of leadership' and other fun terms. I think those are inaccurate to large extent. The failure is in the structure of the two party system in the United States. Why is the Tea Party mucking up the core Republican Party public image and platform, why can't the Tea Party survive by itself on merits all its own?
For that matter, if climate/environment are worthy focus issues of their own with a lot of support, why doesn't the Green Party get more national weight than in 2-3 states as a local phenomenon? Can we let actual socialists be a Socialist party, away from the Democrats (which really are not the same thing no matter what conservative talking heads want us to believe)?
Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. It is time, probably past time, for the political establishment to embrace the diversity of our nation within the core structure of the 'process' and stop forcing political dialogue to gravity to two poles. I do not see real compromise, cooperation, and progress coming until the individual voices get broken from the Ying-Yang dichotomy within which we are trapped.
Look at the current drama of the government 'shutdown'. The Republican Party is being held politically captive by a faction which is essentially a third party within it, 'The Tea Party'. We even call it a party, but keep it lumped within the accepted grouping because we cannot allow them to stand on their own.
There is a lot of dialogue and 'podium thumping' at home and on the internet about 'failures of leadership' and other fun terms. I think those are inaccurate to large extent. The failure is in the structure of the two party system in the United States. Why is the Tea Party mucking up the core Republican Party public image and platform, why can't the Tea Party survive by itself on merits all its own?
For that matter, if climate/environment are worthy focus issues of their own with a lot of support, why doesn't the Green Party get more national weight than in 2-3 states as a local phenomenon? Can we let actual socialists be a Socialist party, away from the Democrats (which really are not the same thing no matter what conservative talking heads want us to believe)?
Etcetera, etcetera, etcetera. It is time, probably past time, for the political establishment to embrace the diversity of our nation within the core structure of the 'process' and stop forcing political dialogue to gravity to two poles. I do not see real compromise, cooperation, and progress coming until the individual voices get broken from the Ying-Yang dichotomy within which we are trapped.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)