[EM] Practical Democracy
fredgohlke at verizon.net
Thu Feb 4 11:32:32 PST 2016
Thank you, very much, for your comments. It seems to me we are getting
closer to the heart of the differences in our views.
re: "I'm not sure You are appreciating or accounting for
just how long it takes to vet Candidates and how hard
it is to uncover information both relevant to Voters
and detrimental to the Candidates' aspirations."
I think the difference in our views on this point is in our assessment
of those who become candidates. At present, we know candidates for
public office are committed to serve their party, not the people. Once
these unprincipled people achieve leadership positions, they infect our
society because morality is a top-down phenomenon. This distorts our
view of the kind of people who seek public office.
The problem is not the people; it is a political system that rewards
politicians who are willing to sacrifice their integrity to attract
party backing; a system that renounces virtue and is ruled by cynicism.
It leads us to believe that everyone is as deceitful as our political
leaders. We are misled by the high visibility of deceit and corruption
in our culture. The idea that it is inescapable leads to the
self-defeating notion that trying to correct it is futile.
That's a shame because the vast majority of our peers are decent people.
They have to be, for society could not exist otherwise. When we
include everyone in the political process, the upright people,
uncommitted to anything except those who advance them to public office,
will swamp the deceitful individuals who presently dominate our
My guess is that this is a core difference in our views which we may be
unable to resolve.
re: "I think You also overestimate People's ability to
read body language and underestimate People's ability
to fake such language."
I can't say you're wrong since I can't document my faith in people. But
I can ask you a question that bears on the topic: Do you play bridge?
If you do, I'd guess that you get a lot of insight into the nature of
the people you play with. You can tell which ones are risk-takers,
which are methodical, which do not enjoy the game, which you'll be happy
to have as a partner. Obviously, if you don't play, this will mean
nothing to you, but those who do will understand how it relates to this
discussion. We 'read' our acquaintances, constantly.
re: "By "replace the Representative", I mean in the subsequent
election cycle, if out of sheer coincidence an identical
triad from last time is formed, deciding whether the Person
selected to represent at the next stage is chosen again."
This is not the only concern. Another, even more threatening, is that
personal antipathy between between members of the triad prevents one or
more people advancing. To prevent this, Paragraph (1a) of the
description says, in part:
"The random grouping mechanism must insure that no two
people are assigned to a triad if they served together
in a triad in any of the five most recent elections."
This ensures that, at the lowest level, advancement will neither be
aided or hindered by grouping the same people in a triad.
re: "Your "bribe" response doesn't disprove My premise
or the associated conclusion."
You said you would "not be making any such decision unless I can ensure
I will advance to the next level" and I only commented on the difficulty
of ensuring your own advancement.
I had already pointed out that "The triads are not deciding to replace
their representative.", which seemed to me to be the focus of your
premise. It now seems clear that I didn't understand your premise or
re: "In re recall: I have never been impressed with recalls;
in My estimation, using recalls for reasons other than
criminal activity tends to give too much weight to the
passions of the public and too little weight deliberative
contemplation and patience."
I'm not sure I agree, but recall is not the only option available to
those who implement the process. As mentioned in the description, the
bi-directionality of the process "offers those who implement the process
a broad scope, ranging from simple polling of constituents to referenda
on selected issues and recall of an elected representative." It really
depends on how the process is implemented.
More information about the Election-Methods