There are 2 ideas that should result in BETTER Democracy PERIOD:

[JanMichael]

Seriously... a band of 500 or so monkeys throwing darts at a "Policy Map" could have made better policy choices over the last 40 years than the band of professional politicocks, who rule us, have in reality "accomplished'.

A sense of PURE randomness MAY have led to a NO vote on Iraq, or the TeleCON deal of 1996, or "welfare reform", or the 2003 tax cuts for the filthy fucking rich. Mmmm k?

So why not take INFORMED stratified (weighted by attributes like sex and education etcetera) random selections of the PEOPLE ie. MICROCOSMS or SAMPLES to make some of the decisions that effect EVERYBODY?

Please take a look at this site about Citizen Panels/Jurys and Deliberative Polling!

Please. Please take a look. I beg of you please try to see how we might better extract the will of the involved, the affected/effected, as opposed to the will of the rich, powerful, persuasive, fake "Of The People" types, entrenched and their personal benefitial aims....and the corporations that rule us now economically.

Do you really believe in the will of the People and Humanity or just what the television tells you?

Informed "people" under deliberative conditions are, well, pretty freaking progressive!

Have faith in Humanity. The crap we have now is rule by the powerful and influential, not US, which in my opinion is NOT democratic nor is it the best way to have decisions made that effect us all.



PS~ I bet you two beers (virtual beers dammit) that this gets less than 15 reponses. It's either too deep (ie. the status quo wins again) or too complicated (ie. the status quo wins again) or the regulars are too entrenched in power politics (ie. the status quo wins again) to take notice.

[Trillo]

1. Doesn't seem like the registered trademark

of Deliberative Polling is a particularly democratic ideal, when the entity will receive income from the trademark's use: seems rather "corporate". OTOH, perhaps it's the lessor-of-two evils when considering what we seem to have today.

[JanMichael]

3. It is with or without the legalities of what you've read!

Is the process of Citizens Panels limited to those with a license? NO. Same with the concept of deliberative polling, NO!

Fuck all mighty Al Gore is a proponant...

Criminy...Y'all are killing me.

[Trillo]

4. I actually think it's an interesting idea.

Perhaps that didn't come through-- that's why I added the "OTOH" phrase to balance my first point of dissonance.

I do wonder about the ability of operatives to work such a system. Of course, entities have worked our current constitutional system to the point of criminality. My view is that the corruption goes way, way back. Maybe it is time to shuffle the process.

[JanMichael]

5. There are two ideas presented but I appreciate the interest.

Both concepts use oversite panels to give the power players their input in the process. But even with that the studies have shown a move left in the ultimate outcomes.

The power players try to guide but the deliberative processes negate their personal predudices. It's by design.

Obviously the facilitation of these events must be objective but that's entirely controllable through observers from conflicting interests.

That does not happen in our current system. Transparency is hinted at but not achieved.

I agree with you however a "shake up" is now needed...Seriously needed.

Sorry for the confusion:-)

[JanMichael]

2. I KNOW these are new concepts but PLEASE take a look at them.

I beg this of you.

Seriously we need a more participatory system with more a more deliberative nature...

If not there will be hell to pay later with the direction this form of Capitalism is taking: Towards Plutoctratic Corpo Facism.

[OneBlueSky]

6. the ONE thing that would make a REAL difference PERIOD . . .

is public financing of elections . . . until we take the money out of politics, the system will remain corrupt . . .

[sweetheart]

7. Well, then how about a new constitution

There is no functional one today... and when you create this mini-electoral colleges,
you're just taking on part of what the original framers were up against with
an ignorant public.

[H2O Man]

8. Last week

I was called for "jury duty." I live in a rural, upstate NY county. I reported, as instructed, to the Chenango County courthouse, a building that has a long and significant political/social history. There were approximately 80 people there, besides court personel.

As people came through the metal detector, small groups gathered together. I saw a friend from my childhood, who had quit school in the 8th grade, but who is as self-educated and intelligent as most college graduates. Also, a friend who teaches at a local high school full-time, and at the local state university part-time.

The teacher puts together public forums on issues that are of interest to the local community. His next one will be on the immigrant experience in central New York. He had finished reading my book on the Irish immigrants in this area, and said he plans to have me on the panel to discuss the Irish in general, and Harry Stack Sullivan in particular. Sullivan, born Norwich, was the most influential American psychiatrist; I was employed for decades in the county mental health clinic named after him. By no small coincidence, I know a good bit about the Sullivan family history.

As the minutes we spent talking turned to hours, and the deputies allowed us to stand out of doors and enjoy the beautiful spring weather, the discussion turned to national politics. Issues such as immigration, gas prices, Iraq, and then the Plame scandal drew more and more jurors to our small group. A number of people joined the discussion, but more just listened.

Not a single person expressed any confidence in the direction our country was headed. There was a wonderful dialogue on which of the Founding Fathers we needed to listen most closely to at this time. And so the discussion included everything from Hamilton and the Federalist Papers, to Ben franklin, to Thomas Jefferson. I believe it was the type of discussion that citizens are supposed to engage in. We were standing at the courthouse steps, right at the edge of the park, or "commons." That is what democracy requires.

[northamericancitizen]

9. On my way to check them out, and kicking.

[JanMichael]

10. did you get a chance to read about them?