Thursday, July 2, 2015

Certainly a reform that couldn't hurt, and one that might actually help


The reform in question here is Ranked Choice Voting in multi winner districts which, as the Salon article that discusses it, would likely serve voters better, in the long run, than even independently considered district boundaries would.

My only complaint here would be to remind everyone that it still wouldn't do anything to address the more fundamental issue of "the free flow of information," so essential to any functional democracy, and for which Capitalism thwarts as fundamental aspect of its very being (as money and information are essentially the same thing now).

Let us also not forget that, as Willaim Greider made clear in "Who Will Tell the People," reforms that work against the interests of Big Money seldom stay in place as is, or at all, for very long. Precisely because they can play the long game of influence, and the control of perceptions. Now more than ever as "Amplification" in the age of electronic information systems gives them a depth and breadth of reach with their message not even dreamed of in the old days of Capitalism and Industrialization.

The only reform that will work long term, in my view, is to completely rethink what an effective economic operating system should be in the information age.

It's worse than gerrymandering: This is the reform we need to restore democracy, competitive elections