This is not democracy!
I’m watching CNN right now, and there’s a discussion going on about why the major parties are failing to attract voters who are within their policy/position umbrellas. For instance, why aren’t social conservatives getting out to vote for Republicans? Why aren’t liberals getting out to vote for Democrats?
The answer is so simple and obvious as to be painful.
Voters aren’t on board with the major parties because the major parties don’t represent most voters. After all, only around 2/3 of registered voters felt close enough to a major party to register with it, and many of those did so on account of only a few issues out of many. It got me thinking about the nature of the process, and how strange it is that for something as important as your representative in Congress, you usually get two choices.
Two choices?
We paint ideologies along spectra. It’s rare for someone to be entirely on one pole, and most people gravitate toward the center. Not only that, but we don’t all simply fall into two categories. Again, why are social conservatives expected to be fiscal conservatives and support perpetual warfare? Why are civil rights activists expected to be socialists? For that matter, why am I forced to choose which of my moral values are to be represented by my political representatives? I’m not trying to imply that we should each be represented by someone who is just like us in every way, but I think that more than two choices are in order.
Choosing between two extremes, with no option in the middle, and no “line item” control, is not democracy.
It’s not even a true republic. It’s something less than that; it’s the Cliff’s notes, True/False high school exam version. We are smarter than that, even the average voter. We can do better, even if just by adding more choices.
Today I talked to a lot of voters. Something that I’m learning as I interact with a wider and wider slice of the electorate is that most people want democracy. Most people want different views, including moderate views, to be represented in government. And if you ask them about it, most people like the idea of limiting the power of parties- although the issue is strangely distant from the forefront.
Looking at the state of our government today, the state of disconnect that many voters still have even after an election with unprecedented involvement, and the new technologies that enable us to communicate in new ways, there has never been a better time for this movement to happen.
We can definitely do it. We can definitely change the face of American politics.
All it takes is the effort and confidence to do it.
As you start to talk to people about canging government, keep the numbers in mind. Most people don’t realize just how powerful their influence can be. Most people are surprised to learn that Congressmen can be elected by as few as 80,000 voters. They’re more surprised that a group that would fit in a single large stadium (less than 200,000) can achieve congressional representation. One woman remarked to me upon learning that, “Maybe I should run!” And maybe she should.
I’m not suggesting we underestimate. 200,000, the number we need to guaranty victory, is still a huge number. Because for every vote we achieve, we’ll need to make at least 5 voter contacts- that means over a million voter contacts, per race. But each volunteer can achieve several voters, so we need to look at the steps we’ll have to take. We’re at step one right now, which is just identifying the parties and helping to get them on board. (Actually, I am at step zero- designing the movement and convincing my readers to help.).
This is the beginning of a long and exciting race.
November 10th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I think you need to realize that the United States is not a Democracy. In fact, the founders feared a democracy, hence the reason we are a REPUBLIC and that all states are required by the Constitution to have a republican form of government.
November 11th, 2008 at 1:03 am
To be sure, it is true that the founders did not want a direct democracy. That is not the sense in which I meant the word. The founders DID clearly express their concern about the dangers of political parties, and we are today experiencing the realization of that fear.
The word “democracy” is used pretty commonly in American politics and culture to refer to the ideal of a goverment that is of, by, and for “The People.”
In point of fact, if you merely substitute the word “republic” for the word “democracy”, my argument would not change. The citizenry have relatively little choice in who their leaders are, and while it is hypothetically possible to shape within the parties, most people simply don’t have time. Presenting more choices at the polls would make the nation more of a republic in the founding sense by helping to combat “party line” voting and thoughtless political decisions.