[EM] Re: APR complements Practical Democracy (PD) best (Steve Bosworth)

steve bosworth stevebosworth at hotmail.com
Sun Jan 31 10:28:53 PST 2016



[EM] Re: APR complements Practical
Democracy (PD) best (Steve Bosworth)

 

>
From: election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com

> Subject: Election-Methods Digest, Vol 139, Issue 23

> To: election-methods at lists.electorama.com

> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 06:54:49 -0800

> 

[….]

>
1. Re: Practical Democracy (Frank Martinez)

> 

> Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2016 09:54:46 -0500

> From: Frank Martinez <frankdmartinez at gmail.com>

> To: Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net>

> Cc: "election-methods at lists.electorama.com"

> <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>

> Subject: Re: [EM] Practical Democrach

[….]

 

From
Steve to Fred and everyone:

 

M:
> On Monday, January 25, 2016, Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net>
wrote:

> 

> > PRACTICAL DEMOCRACY

> >

> > Abstract

> > --------

> > When we speak of government by the people, 'the people' is not an

> > amorphous mass. It is an abundance of individuals: some brilliant,
some

> > dull; some good, some bad; some with integrity, some deceitful. To
achieve

> > government by the people, we must sift through this diversity to find
the

> > individuals with the qualities needed to address and resolve
contemporary

> > public concerns.

> >

> > In a truly democratic political process, the entire electorate will

> > participate in defining the issues the government must address and

> > selecting the individuals best equipped to resolve those issues. The
size

> > of the electorate and the varying level of interest in public affairs
among

> > the populace make the matter of including everyone a challenge.

 

S:
Fred, I see your voluntary Practical Democracy’s (PD’s) triadic and multi-leveled
process as very valuable.  It wisely
suggests how as many of the citizens of a country as are willing could agree to
work together to improve their political knowledge, skills and opportunities.
It would help give them as much influence as possible on the binding
decisions-made formally by a state’s legislative assembly and government (or
any level of jurisdiction within that state).  The more citizens who participated, the more
democratic and wise are these decisions likely to be.

 

At
the same time, I want to argue that the formal electoral system which would
maximize the likelihood of PD being successful in making these decisions fully
democratic is Associational Proportional Representation (APR). For example,
APR’s primary election allows 

1)     
all citizens directly to decide which
applicant organizations will be the electoral “associations” through which all
candidates will be selected to run during the later general election, and

2)     
APR’s general election allows each
citizen to guarantee that her one vote will be added to the “weighted vote” of
the one elected candidate in the legislative assembly whom she trusts to
represent her own values and concerns. I am emailing the article to you
separately which systematically explains how APR works:  “Equal Voting Sustained”.  I will also email it to anyone else who
requests it (stevebosworth at hotmail.com).

 

Please
let me know whether or not you also find APR to be the electoral system that
would complement PD best.

 

Below,
are listed some of the phrases from your own ABSTRACT which most strikingly
suggest to me that PD and APR would entirely complement each other:

1)     
>>…. to identify the individuals
most motivated and best qualified to address and resolve the people's concerns;

2)     
>> When the people are only
allowed to choose from party-chosen options, the

> > ability to vote for one of them is neither free nor democratic. 

3)     
>> In spite of the dangers
inherent in partisanship, we must recognize that

> > it is a vital part of society. People differ, and it is essential
that

> > they should, because we advance our common interest by examining

> > conceivable options. Differing people seek out and align themselves
with

> > others who share their views. In the process of doing so, they hone
their

> > views to help form a consensus. That is the way they give breadth,
depth

> > and volume to their voice.

4)     
>> …. open inquiry

5)     
>> Intelligent decisions require
discourse; assertions must be examined, not

> > in the sterile environment of a televised debate, but in depth. The

> > electorate must be able to examine candidates and discuss matters of
public

> > concern, and, with the knowledge so gained, make decisions.

6)     
 >>
New machinery to support a democratic political process

> > must enable and encourage dialogue and deliberation on

> > political issues among the electorate.

7)     
>> What choices are available to
the voters when the only names on the ballot

> > are those chosen by the parties? When the dominant party repeatedly

> > chooses the same candidate and the opposing candidate is an
unacceptable

> > alternative, the people have no way to bring new minds to their

> > government. Systems that let organized groups decide who can be a

> > candidate for public office are profoundly undemocratic.

8)     
>> Dynamic systems require fresh
minds. The current and emerging problems

> > facing the electorate change constantly. The inability to select new

> > representatives equipped to resolve contemporary issues injures the
entire

> > community. In addition, rot thrives in a closed environment. Just
like

> > with apples in barrels, corruption flourishes when incumbents are

> > repeatedly returned to office.

9)     
>> New machinery to support a
democratic political process

> > must include a way for the people to change their

> > representatives, as they deem appropriate.

10)  >>
The challenge of democracy is to find the best advocates of the common

> > interest and raise them to positions of leadership. To meet that

> > challenge, given the range of public issues and the way each
individual's

> > interest in political matters varies over time, an effective
electoral

> > process must examine the entire electorate during each electoral
cycle,

> > seeking the people's best advocates.

> >

> > Machinery that gives the entire electorate a voice in the political

> > process must accommodate the fact that the desire to participate in

> > political affairs varies from one individual to the next. Some have
no

> > desire to participate, some will participate for altruistic reasons,
some

> > will participate to advance their self-interest, and some will be

> > indifferent. To reconcile this diversity, a democratic process must
be

> > open to all, without coercion.

> >

> > We cannot know what treasures of political ability will be unearthed
when

> > people are invited to deliberate on their common concerns - with a

> > purpose. Some, who start out unsure of their ability, will, as they
learn

> > they can persuade others of the value of their perspective, gain
confidence

> > in their ability to influence the political process. In doing so, the

> > people gain the internal goods that can only be attained through the

> > practice of politics.

11)   >> New machinery to support a democratic
political process

> > must be inclusive. It must be a bottom-up arrangement

> > that lets every member of the community influence political

> > decisions to the full extent of each individual's desire and

> > ability.

12)  >
> Political systems are always an embodiment of human nature. Since we

> > cannot divorce our political institutions from our own nature, the
new

> > machinery to support a democratic political process must harness our

> > nature. It must make the qualities needed to represent the common interest

> > desirable attributes in those who seek political advancement.

> > Given the wide range of desire and ability among the members of
society,

> > an inclusive environment must be arranged to encourage the greatest

> > participation.

13)  >>
Pogrebinschi

> > found that "... policies for minority groups deliberated in the
national

> > conferences tend to be crosscutting as to their content. The policies
tend

> > to favor more than one group simultaneously..."[8]

> >

> > If we are to create an environment for effective political dialogue,
we

> > must create a framework in which all citizens are encouraged to
discuss

> > their political concerns with their peers. Such inclusiveness can be

> > achieved by arranging the voters in small groups where people with

> > differing views discuss issues that concern them.

> >

> > Since public issues are inseparable from the people who resolve them,
the

> > groups must identify the individuals in their group who best
represent

> > their interests. The people so chosen can deliberate with the choices
of

> > other groups to identify the community's most pressing issues and the

> > individuals best suited to address them.

14)  >>
The purpose of the process is to advance the best advocates of each

> > group's perspective on contemporary problems, in a pyramidal fashion,
to

> > deliberate with the selections of other groups.

15)   >> Viewed this way, we can say that when
selecting representatives of the

> > public interest, a system that encourages dialogue is preferable to
one

> > that relies on a monologue [….]

16)  >>
People that do

> > not declare group membership are automatically assigned to

> > a set of people with no affiliation. Triads will be

> > created from members of the same interest group [same “electoral
association”], as long as more than two members of the group exist.

17)  >>
The final phase of the Practical Democracy (PD) process, electing

> > candidates to specific public offices, is omitted from this outline
because

> > that task is implementation-dependent. [Steve claims that the optimal
“final phase” would be the use of APR to elect the legislative assembly.

18)  >>
The PD process lets particular interests attract supporters to

> > their cause and elevate their most effective advocates during each

> > electoral cycle. Advocates of those interests can proclaim their
ideas and

> > encourage discussion of their concepts. Some will be accepted, in
whole or

> > in part, as they are shown to be in the common interest of the
community.

19)  >>
Most people expect their elected officials to represent their interests.

> > The difficulty is that communities are made up of diverse interests
and the

> > relations between those interests can be contentious. Constructive

> > resolution of political issues requires, first of all, lawmakers with
the

> > ability to recognize the value in the various points of view, from
the

> > people's perspective. That is impossible for legislators elected to

> > represent partisan interests.

20)  >>
PD focuses on selecting representatives who will resolve adversarial

> > encounters to the advantage of the commonweal. During the process,

> > participants necessarily consider both common and conflicting
interests,

> > and, because PD is intrinsically bidirectional, it gives advocates of

> > conflicting interests a continuing voice. At the same time, it
encourages

> > the absorption of diverse interests, reducing them to their essential

> > element: their effect on the participants in the electoral process.

21)  
> > PD is a bottom-up process
that lets every member of the community

> > participate to the full extent of each individual's desire and
ability,

> >

> > 1--> it incorporates partisanship without letting partisans

> > control the process;

> >

> > 3--> it enables and encourages dialogue and deliberation on

> > political issues among the electorate;

> >

> > 4--> it includes a way for the people to change their

> > representatives as they deem appropriate; and

> >

> > 5--> it is a bottom-up arrangement that lets every member of

> > the community influence political decisions to the full

> > extent of each individual's desire and ability.

> >

> > That is the essence of a democratic political process.



S:  I look forward to any replies, comments,
criticisms, questions, or counter arguments.

 

Steve

  		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20160131/b2d00b48/attachment-0001.htm>


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list