Democracy And Free Markets: Is That All?

Public Policy Improvements

Change seems to be occurring at a much greater rate than our culture’s ability to adapt and for all those who thrive in the modern world there are plenty who are falling by the wayside.

We are shallow, shortsighted, arrogant, and unsophisticated and we don’t seem to care because we are the richest and mightiest.

Yet for all our technological achievements we still struggle with the same questions regarding what is important in life such as money and the attainment of stuff or something more esoteric that people did thousands of years ago. We confuse the benefits and rewards of capitalism with that which is noble. We have greater knowledge but lack enlightenment.

I don't know if this is a harbinger of disaster as much as opportunity lost.

Douglass Carmichael John, what would make a positive difference? What are your "shoulds"?

(Participant)
1. Liberal arts education, with an emphasis on how to think not what to think beginning at an early age.

2. Educate our children to appreciate and respect the individual and the community and to inspire them to seek to optimize human potential recognizing that although it is different for everyone it has equal value.

3. Educate our children to understand the difference between value and money and to appreciate that passion, regardless of monetary reward is priceless.

The above are obviously long-term projects to change attitudes and realistically might only be achievable on an individual family basis.

Currently we should have:

1. Leaders (Government, Religious, Business, Professions) with integrity otherwise self criticism is impossible and the improvement that can result.

2. Remove the money from politics.

3. Change election process so that it is shorter and government financed to encourage greater participation.

4. Concerted effort to improve voter participation.

5. Apply the same standards to Government as Business with regard to conflicts and integrity with independent oversight.

6. Amend constitution so that for every dollar spent on defense a proportionate amount must be spent on education.

7. Have achievable mandatory goals with regard to the environment and open space (parks, wilderness, etc.).

8. Compulsory service (humanitarian or community) for 18 to 20 year olds, male and female with postings domestically and abroad.

The above is a partial wish list.

John: Your list just above is basic, and skillfully divides the ideas into two discreet bundles: better education for our citizen/electorate as essential for our "democracy") in one bundle and specific action suggestions such as those described in your list from 2-7.

For my present purpose, I would move items 1 and 8 from this list into the one above as related to our decision-making culture -- a combination of "we, the people" and those who have "earned" the title of "leaders".

It might now be a good time to consider better ways to implement your specific suggestions by improved "democratic" roles for leaders and citizens.

For example, your #8: Compulsory service (humanitarian or community) for 18 to 20 year olds), fits into an idea that I have long harbored without finding a proper niche for it. In short-hand, it is as follows:

* The role of citizens in our democracy is now obsolete in that the information demanded for constructive selection of representative AND for participation in the more demanding roles in referenda is vastly greater than it was when the Constitution was being written. We need both to upgrade our basic education of citizens and to provide specific further education (other than adversarial sound-bites) for citizens asked to address the kinds of issues that we have been discussing here. (See analogy to jurors below).

* New ways for engaging thousands, not just face-to-face meetings of hundreds, have been developed both through soft-ware procedures and hard-ware electronic exchanges such as we are having here. There is need to experiment with these procedures in the main stream of citizen participation in decision making.

* We have long drafted citizens in "compulsory service" for jury duty where the average citizen is then "educated" for reaching highly important, big ticket, life and death decisions with the help of highly trained legal "leaders".

* We might consider drafting statistical samples of citizens to address and seek consensus on issues like those in items 2-7 in John's list above as an alternative or replacement for the yes/no choices now submitted to all citizens in referenda.

----------------------

This is still a half-baked idea, but there are a growing number of experiments along these lines. But basic to this is the need to find improved ways for engaging more citizens in governance -- not that they will be more inventive than groups like the ILF, but unless we arouse a more vocal and engaged citizenry, we will continue to be at the mercy of those in power without the "checks and balances" that "we, the people" are required for a continuing democracy.

I'm particularly struck with John's #6: "Amend constitution so that for every dollar spent on defense a proportionate amount must be spent on education." That wouldn't actually require a constitutional amendment, just an education-minded government. It's not just a matter of spending enough on pre-school and K-12 schooling, though that is certainly fundamental. What's also required is an understanding that the most important "R & D" of all is that combination of graduate education and innovative research which produces major breakthroughs in every field of study and practice.

This is probably an issue that ILF Fellows could get together on, and -- by getting together and making sense -- have some real influence in future public policy.

(Participant) John, an excellent short list. I'd suggest that # 1 of the second group (Leaders (Government, Religious, Business, Professions) ….etc.) really belongs in the first section because it's something that has to be inculcated through social and familial training. Numbers 2 through 8, though, are achievable by law. Personally I have a very powerful and visceral opposition to # 8 (though I won't refute the logic and good intention of it).

(Participant) As you can see in my over-confused # 12, I am in favor of John's # 8 with equal but opposite visceral feelings to those of Kip's. Again let me state, because I think this is so central to our renewing of democracy, we need to curtail the disengagement of citizens and provide a better structure for their participation.

What I have tried to stir up, so far without success, is a dialogue on the future role of citizens in 20th century democracy. Kip, John (and others): could you address this in more detail?

Previous Page          Next Page

top