I’m not a Democrat, but I’m certainly not a Republican either; given the choice between A, B, or C, I would vote for Obama or even Hillary rather than McCain (unless by some miracle Gore resurfaces or Nader develops superpowers). However, my heart isn’t in it; I’m sure Obama is a fine person, but one person cannot remake Washington, even with a majority in both houses. And so I direct the following question to all liberals in the hope that upon reflection I may convince you that new forms of political organization are called for;
By what logic can I reasonably imagine that the fundamental and vitally critical goals of environmental sustainability, economic stability and social justice will ever be met simply by participating in the politics of liberal democracy?
One need only read a small amount of history to learn that the founders of our republic were little concerned with social justice and that their economic concerns consisted primarily in creating a healthy environment for an expanding capitalism, not for breathing. The views of the framers were progressive only insomuch as they represented an advance over the traditional feudal system based on rule by hereditary nobility (George III). The new system of government instituted by the framers may have been an improvement over the British colonial administration but it hardly represented a complete break with the past; and there were a substantial number of citizens right from the start who were anything but satisfied. Shays’ rebellion actually took place during the constitutional convention and the Whiskey rebellion took place a few years later; in both cases armed citizens (many of whom had fought in the Revolution) resisted the policies of their new government (ruinous regressive taxes payable in hard currency at a time when worthless paper currency had largely been supplanted by a barter economy). In contemporary terms, one might compare the situation of these "rebels" with that of the National Guard solder returning from Iraq to find his old job gone and his home in foreclosure. Neither does the institution of universal (white, male) suffrage during the course of the 19th century appear to have been a tremendous improvement. The possession of suffrage in itself does not guarantee authentic representation for the mass of citizens; politics has always been restricted to those citizens possessing "leisure" and "social connections". Increasingly the process was shaped and influenced by the newspapers and political parties which effectively "herded" the expanded electorate; a development only intensified by each new mass media technology. William Randolph Hearst brought us the Spanish-American War; more recently Rupert Murdoch paved the way for "Desert Storm". Neither or these wars served the interest of "the people", but they did serve the political and business interests of the elite. Consider the following quote by a U.S. Senator speaking in the middle of the nineteenth century;
"A party is in one sense a joint stock association, in which those who contribute most direct the action and management of the concern...."Chapter 14
Beard, Charles & Mary (1921), History of the United States
http://www.gutenberg.org/...
Democrat, Republican, or "other" – most of us agree that our political system is run by money. The critical point to understand (I believe) is that this situation is not new; it is intrinsic to our system of government. And while the excesses under a Democratic regime are usually much less egregious, the fundamental rule stated above continues to apply. Propaganda notwithstanding, government "by the people" is nothing of the sort; it is a mechanism by which the ruling elite effectively "herd" "the people", thus maintaining the existing socio-economic system in spite of the fact that this system manifestly does not serve the interests of most citizens (not to mention the other inhabitants of our planet).
I don’t wish to appear arrogant by minimizing the many great efforts and tremendous accomplishments of the liberal community. I simply don’t see how we can ever expect to fully achieve our goals by playing a game (electoral politics) which is clearly rigged and always has been. Many fine people have made heroic efforts with the intention that our political system should serve the interests of social welfare and environmental health. Jimmy Carter made a sincere effort to change our national energy policy in the 70’s and Hillary Clinton certainly had her plans for changing the healthcare system in the 90’s; but their efforts went nowhere. When the entire economy melted down in the 30’s the New Deal was a big step in the right direction (largely because the elite were terrified by what had happened in Russia just a few years previously!), but most of that progress has been erased over the past 25 years. We live in a crowded, polluted, heavily armed world; the time for half measures and compromise is drawing to a close. Instead of trying to make our political system yield a result that was never intended, I believe we need to think more creatively. "Democracy" as we know it is a multiple choice exam on which the correct answer is usually "none of the above"; this path does not represent an acceptable plan for a live-able future! Allowing our options to be imposed by an elite of power hungry sociopaths is a form of collective suicide.
What do I suggest? Well, by all means continue to blog and continue to vote (do whatever possible to make the existing system work); but if you are truly worried about the future (as I am) then I would like to suggest an assignment for "extra credit". Join me in building a new institution which can coexist with electoral politics but also function independently of politics. Traditional politics may be analogous to bailing a boat which is still actively leaking; I suggest that we build an institution which can function as a dry-dock; an institution which can rise above the divisiveness of partisan politics and move beyond the artificial limitations imposed by the elite who control our political institutions. Perhaps then we can make more lasting repairs.
Specifically what I am suggesting is this;
An organization in some respects similar to A.A. insomuch as the basic unit consists of a small group which conducts regular meetings motivated by a set of shared beliefs and a common purpose. Like A.A. there would be founding documents (a "big book" of sorts) to provide a common vocabulary and fundamental concepts (Essentially a very basic primer on human civilization). This same book would stress the importance of education, reasoned debate, and solidarity as tools to facilitate the process of change. The groups would be arranged in the form of an inverted hierarchy with the ultimate aim of generating proposals at the group level for collective action (political or otherwise). These proposals would circulate at successive levels in the hierarchy subject to approval or rejection based on the general consensus. The best proposals would stand out on the basis of merit, not hype. Undoubtedly the internet would provide a forum for debate to supplement the small group setting, as well as a medium to facilitate the actual referendum process, but the need to deliberate and vote at the level of the small physical group would always remain essential. During most of our history as a species we have co-existed in smaller groups, I believe this is the organizing unit which provides us with the best prospect for success.
Of course such an institution will not appeal to most people but if even one percent of the population participated the results might be decisive. By my count, one percent of the population contributing one hundred dollars each would be more than adequate to "purchase" an entirely new government! Alternately, a group this size might generate seed capital for start up enterprises to alleviate environmental and social ills (i.e. Bio-Fuels; but not produced from corn grown by a petroleum based agriculture that drives up food prices). The possibilities are enormous, and limited only by the creativity of the best and brightest among us. No doubt you yourself may have some seeds of genius in search of fertile ground. The important thing, I believe, is the process; creative, democratic and unrestrained by the anti-social forces of corporate or personal greed.
If this makes any sense to you then please share your views and please visit my new blog at;
http://doityourselfdemocracy.blogspo...
And Please, be patient if my response time seems glacial, my "leisure" time for blogging is extemely limited.