At 12:24 AM 11/15/2005, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote: >[quoting] I reply: > Although governments may be politically omnipotent in > theory, in practice >corporations, schools, unions, religious groups, and nonprofits >collectively wield an easily comparable amount of power. > >Mike Ossipoff replies: > >Then please ask your local neighborhood school, or your union, to order the >troops home from Iraq.
The key is "collectively." If there is a way for these organizations to act collectively, they would have the power to do exactly that. Consider how much it costs to buy a U.S. presidential election. I think it is under a billion dollars, a bargain at twice the price. How many people belong to unions? How much would each member have to contribute to raise the billion dollars? If it were important to them, if the organization coordinating the funding were trustworthy, *they could afford it.* However, all these organizations only, typically, wield power in the service of relatively narrow interests. Exercise them enough, they will act collectively. But it's rare. There are no mechanisms for developing the necessary consensus, for all these organizations are structured traditionally: they are either oligarchies or they are electoral democracies, both of which are quite limited in the power to find and express consensus. If all those who wanted to stop the war in Iraq, before the U.S. invaded, had pooled the resources that they expended in demonstrations, it would also have collected enough to buy the next presidential election. Instead, those resources were squandered, I'd suggest, on a gesture of powerlessness. When you have the power, you don't demonstrate, you act. I imagine a representative of the Stop the War Free Association making an appointment with President Bush, prior to the invasion. "Mr. Bush, I have here a check for one billion dollars, which our members have decided to donate to Anybody But Bush in 2004, according to our own process, should you decide to invade Iraq. Don't invade Iraq, I'll tear up the check. Naturally, you will, I am sure, make the best decision...." Would it have gotten his attention? I don't know. But I do know that the people have the power to stop the war. If they care to, and if they come to believe that it is possible. Both are necessary; many *would* care, but cynicism and despair about the possibility of being able to make a difference is deeply rooted. FA/DP democracy could start today and it could, by its nature, once established, grow like wildfire.... Lift a finger, change the world. But most people won't lift a finger. leading to the new slogan, Change the world in one easy step. Go to sleep. We will change it for you. Sinister? Yes. If you don't like it, Wake Up! You have choices that you can make. Today. http://beyondpolitics.org/wiki : Register! BeyondPolitics is not about stopping the war, that's a political position. Rather, it is about creating mechanisms where people can quickly and efficiently make trustworthy decisions and act on them. If that stops the war, fine with me, it is certainly what I personally desire. But I'm focused on a generic solution, the current war is only one problem among many, many indeed. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
