Good Afternoon, Tim
There seems to be some similarity in our views. I certainly don't think changing our system will be easy. I don't expect to see it happen in my remaining years, but, we should be able to start marshalling ideas and honing them.
We need a place to start, and defining our goals may be a good one. We know from bitter experience that the party system is flawed. We know corruption pervades our political process because parties control the selection of candidates for public office. We know candidates are not chosen for their integrity. Quite the contrary. They are chosen after they demonstrate their willingness and ability to dissemble, to obfuscate and to mislead the electorate. They are chosen when they prove they will renounce principle and sacrifice honor for the benefit of their party.
We want to change that.
Our nation has a wealth of decent, principled people. The pool from which we can draw is immense. At which desks, behind which wheels, before which stoves, down which streets are the people with the persuasiveness, with the knowledge and understanding, with the pride and desire to make a mark for themselves in the conduct of our public affairs? Who are the individuals who will thrive and blossom when their reason is consulted, and, free of pressure, they ponder current and prospective concerns to reach sound decisions?
They are out there. Our purpose is to find them and elevate them to positions of trust, as our representatives. What method can we use to do so?
The method must be democratic, i.e., it must allow the entire electorate to participate. It must be egalitarian, i.e., it must give everyone an equal chance of being elected to public office. It must (taken from Mary Cluney's comment) involve face-to-face discussion, and, I think, it must be in harmony with human nature.
Do we have more requirements?
Fred |
