The United States census of 1790, taken 3 years after the ratification of the constitution, revealed that there were just under 4 million people living in the entire country.
Today, the population of Massachusetts alone is estimated at about six and a half million. The entire population of New York State at the time is one twenty-third that of modern-day New York City alone. The country’s population as a whole has surpassed 300 million strong; a nearly 100 fold increase.
Yet we have continued to operate with a scheme of representation that allocates only two Senators per state.
And though our representation in the House of Representatives is allocated proportionally, the numbers of constituents per representative ranges from around 500,000 to nearly a million: in 1790 with this type of representation would have meant only 4-8 members of the house representing the views of the entire nation.
No wonder politicians these days seem so out of touch with their constituency.
How can we expect a diverse range of interests to be adequately represented when populations of districts are huge enough, in many cases, to be countries unto themselves? How can we expect a senator representing millions of voters to resonate with and understand the concerns of their constituency? How can a person make their voice heard over the competition of countless others?
So although public participation in the process has come to be thought of as a most vital facet of our government, we have continually seen the value of the individual’s contribution diminished. More and more we struggle to see the value in voting, voicing our opinions, or even thinking about politics: there’s just nothing that can be done by that individual voter.
As a result, more and more our representatives seem unconnected with the sentiments of America. When Larry Craig was caught soliciting sex in a bathroom, it was his fellow Senators, more than the constituency whose interests he represents, that were seen calling for his resignation.
Nobody stopped to ask whether it was appropriate for members of congress living far beyond the borders of a representative’s state to so-demand his removal. Should this not be the province of voters? Or have we resigned ourselves to the reality that the voting base of the country is increasingly irrelevant?
It seems so.
The approval rating for congress is around 11 percent and the president’s has hit a historical low of 24 percent, yet very little is being done to change the way of things.
The voices of reform that “we the people” seem to need are relegated to the fringes, and the idea of sweeping, reformist legislation taking effect is nothing more than a pipe dream.
Without better representation we cannot have a functional democracy.
Where’s our new deal?
Sunday, October 28, 2007
Friday, October 19, 2007
How to Be a Radical
If TV has taught me anything (and it has), it's that moderate or balanced political and social beliefs are SO last century. Anybody of any worth, a criteria to be judged by whether or not one has their own show, knows that in order to be intelligent and worth listening to, you must choose a side of the political spectrum and stick with it, no matter what the outcome. So here are a few simple, easy-to-use steps to becoming a radical.
First, choose a party. This part is easy; you're either a Republican or a Democrat. All you need to know about Republicans is that they are God-fearing, gay-fearing, pro-war Southerners, and all Democrats are godless, latte-loving, hippie northerners. If you're having trouble choosing, or just want to have a little fun, try flipping a coin.
Remember, it doesn't really matter which side you choose, so long as you always loudly and angrily defend your party while defiantly rejecting the platforms of the other.
Second, find someone on TV who agrees with your party, and do every single thing they say. TV is great. It's filled with smart people, with smart ideas, telling you how to be smart yourself. You can even find whole smart networks of people who think just like you!
Try Fox News or CNN to start with, but don't feel like you have to keep watching if there's something boring on - like yet another speech, by yet another guy, in yet another suit.
I find that MTV, E!, and even the Game Show Network can all be just as entertaining and informative as cable news networks, and channel surfing is fun!
Third, never mix and match. You wouldn't throw your dark laundry in with your whites, would you? Neither should you mix political views. There are no shades of grey allowed in politics.
Like guns? Then you should be arguing for your constitutional guarantee to carry around that rocket-launcher you cobbled together in your basement, or better yet, bring it into hospitals and amusement parks!
Just like old Dubya said, "You're either with us or against us."
Finally, always remember that there is only one side to every issue: your side. Everybody who thinks differently than you (it could be 90 percent of the population) is wrong and foolish; so wrong in fact, that you don't even need to consider their arguments. So don't.
I find my best arguing strategy consists simply in yelling my opinions at the top of my lungs. Not only does that get my point across really well, but it tends to drown out my opponent to boot!
Keep these few simple steps in mind, and you too can become the edgy, status-quo bucking radical that you've always aspired to be. It's what all the cool kids are doing, right?
First, choose a party. This part is easy; you're either a Republican or a Democrat. All you need to know about Republicans is that they are God-fearing, gay-fearing, pro-war Southerners, and all Democrats are godless, latte-loving, hippie northerners. If you're having trouble choosing, or just want to have a little fun, try flipping a coin.
Remember, it doesn't really matter which side you choose, so long as you always loudly and angrily defend your party while defiantly rejecting the platforms of the other.
Second, find someone on TV who agrees with your party, and do every single thing they say. TV is great. It's filled with smart people, with smart ideas, telling you how to be smart yourself. You can even find whole smart networks of people who think just like you!
Try Fox News or CNN to start with, but don't feel like you have to keep watching if there's something boring on - like yet another speech, by yet another guy, in yet another suit.
I find that MTV, E!, and even the Game Show Network can all be just as entertaining and informative as cable news networks, and channel surfing is fun!
Third, never mix and match. You wouldn't throw your dark laundry in with your whites, would you? Neither should you mix political views. There are no shades of grey allowed in politics.
Like guns? Then you should be arguing for your constitutional guarantee to carry around that rocket-launcher you cobbled together in your basement, or better yet, bring it into hospitals and amusement parks!
Just like old Dubya said, "You're either with us or against us."
Finally, always remember that there is only one side to every issue: your side. Everybody who thinks differently than you (it could be 90 percent of the population) is wrong and foolish; so wrong in fact, that you don't even need to consider their arguments. So don't.
I find my best arguing strategy consists simply in yelling my opinions at the top of my lungs. Not only does that get my point across really well, but it tends to drown out my opponent to boot!
Keep these few simple steps in mind, and you too can become the edgy, status-quo bucking radical that you've always aspired to be. It's what all the cool kids are doing, right?
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
Devout Atheism
I find belief in God exceedingly difficult to accept.
To me, there is nothing characteristically different in faith in a greater power more than any other superstition. They are equally untestable, unreasonable, and downright unscientific.
We humans are greater, more impressive beings than any other on the planet solely because we have inherited the unparalleled ability to reason.
It is the unequaled capacity of our minds that has given us the ability to travel to the moon, split the atom and begin unraveling the secrets of our origin. Without it, you wouldn’t be able to read this article.
But when we choose to believe in something like a god, we throw that reason away; in a sense, compromising our humanity.
Our species should be above this.
Our focus should lie not in appeasing some imagined being in the sky, or attaining bliss after our bodies have perished, but in using our reason to create a more balanced, harmonious world here on Earth.
Some theists contend that, without religion, without a fear of the afterlife, we cannot do this, we cannot be moral beings. Without faith we would all be running around naked raping and killing one another at will.
Yet, in practice, the opposite seems to be true. I need not point out the countless numbers that have suffered, and continue to suffer, on behalf of organized religions of all sort.
But can you name a crusade or oppressive regime inspired by atheism?
This is not to say that all, or even most, religions will necessarily inspire acts of violence, but that people should not feel that they need it to do acts of good.
If we dispel this notion, we throw away countless justifications for evils like ideologically driven killings, oppression of homosexuals and other minorities and the condemnation of other beliefs which could not exist without faith in the supernatural.
If we cease needing religious belief to compel us to do good things we can find humanity more meaningfully united in peace and reason, and will find ourselves reliant not on the weaknesses of our spirit and superstition, but on the strength of our greatest intellect.
The human condition would be better suited by our taking support and comfort in each other, rather than in the dreamed-up love of dreamed-up gods.
To me, there is nothing characteristically different in faith in a greater power more than any other superstition. They are equally untestable, unreasonable, and downright unscientific.
We humans are greater, more impressive beings than any other on the planet solely because we have inherited the unparalleled ability to reason.
It is the unequaled capacity of our minds that has given us the ability to travel to the moon, split the atom and begin unraveling the secrets of our origin. Without it, you wouldn’t be able to read this article.
But when we choose to believe in something like a god, we throw that reason away; in a sense, compromising our humanity.
Our species should be above this.
Our focus should lie not in appeasing some imagined being in the sky, or attaining bliss after our bodies have perished, but in using our reason to create a more balanced, harmonious world here on Earth.
Some theists contend that, without religion, without a fear of the afterlife, we cannot do this, we cannot be moral beings. Without faith we would all be running around naked raping and killing one another at will.
Yet, in practice, the opposite seems to be true. I need not point out the countless numbers that have suffered, and continue to suffer, on behalf of organized religions of all sort.
But can you name a crusade or oppressive regime inspired by atheism?
This is not to say that all, or even most, religions will necessarily inspire acts of violence, but that people should not feel that they need it to do acts of good.
If we dispel this notion, we throw away countless justifications for evils like ideologically driven killings, oppression of homosexuals and other minorities and the condemnation of other beliefs which could not exist without faith in the supernatural.
If we cease needing religious belief to compel us to do good things we can find humanity more meaningfully united in peace and reason, and will find ourselves reliant not on the weaknesses of our spirit and superstition, but on the strength of our greatest intellect.
The human condition would be better suited by our taking support and comfort in each other, rather than in the dreamed-up love of dreamed-up gods.
Sunday, October 14, 2007
A threat from within
Our country (the United States), but its establishment more significantly and profoundly, has been inflicted with a stubborn and unfortunate refusal to accept ideas which come from outside of the main stream.
Many such ideas are not radical, or even new, but merely do not come from the mouths of the right people.
Overly cautious politicians, who's allegiances lie more greatly to power and party than country, have shied away from articulating complex and interesting ideas in favor of those which are most readily manipulated by rhetoric. And unfortunately this has proved the tactic best suited for continuous reelection. These are the Hillary Clintons, the Barak Obamas, and the Rudy Giulianis of our nation, the seemingly unstoppable political juggernaughts who have captured the power to dictate the course of debate for themselves.
This I believe to be of greater threat than any other. The massive oversimplifications of any successful, modern political campaign do not translate well into decisions of policy and often repel voters delving into and scrutinizing the actions of their representatives.
As a result, the task of politicking has become something more of a game than an nation-improving endeavor. It is accepted that manipulation of legal peculiarities and the public's general lack of knowledge of such matters is somehow okay. It is accepted that politicians will use effectively meaningless jargon to smear on another. It is accepted that dialogue between major rivals is to be hollow and focused around only the few issues of the candidates' choosing.
I fear that there may be now way to put an end to this without us having to endure major and unsettling events. How are we to otherwise cut through the dense web of corruption and self-interest spun by our representatives?
It is in the hands of the dishonest and greedy that the power to create vital and substantial changes lies. Are we to expect a culture of altruism to spontaneously flourish upon capitol hill, in which those governing our nation suddenly decide to relinquish their mountainous authority?
It is only through a lively and energized public that we may refresh our flagging democracy. It is up to us, the civilian base of our nation to discuss, to yell and scream, to feel passionately about the course of our great country. It is time for a new patriotism to arise, one which means allegiance to a country and its people in a way that does not require our supporting a bad government.
The pen is indeed mighty, but if it is left broken and unused then we have no defense from the sword.
Many such ideas are not radical, or even new, but merely do not come from the mouths of the right people.
Overly cautious politicians, who's allegiances lie more greatly to power and party than country, have shied away from articulating complex and interesting ideas in favor of those which are most readily manipulated by rhetoric. And unfortunately this has proved the tactic best suited for continuous reelection. These are the Hillary Clintons, the Barak Obamas, and the Rudy Giulianis of our nation, the seemingly unstoppable political juggernaughts who have captured the power to dictate the course of debate for themselves.
This I believe to be of greater threat than any other. The massive oversimplifications of any successful, modern political campaign do not translate well into decisions of policy and often repel voters delving into and scrutinizing the actions of their representatives.
As a result, the task of politicking has become something more of a game than an nation-improving endeavor. It is accepted that manipulation of legal peculiarities and the public's general lack of knowledge of such matters is somehow okay. It is accepted that politicians will use effectively meaningless jargon to smear on another. It is accepted that dialogue between major rivals is to be hollow and focused around only the few issues of the candidates' choosing.
I fear that there may be now way to put an end to this without us having to endure major and unsettling events. How are we to otherwise cut through the dense web of corruption and self-interest spun by our representatives?
It is in the hands of the dishonest and greedy that the power to create vital and substantial changes lies. Are we to expect a culture of altruism to spontaneously flourish upon capitol hill, in which those governing our nation suddenly decide to relinquish their mountainous authority?
It is only through a lively and energized public that we may refresh our flagging democracy. It is up to us, the civilian base of our nation to discuss, to yell and scream, to feel passionately about the course of our great country. It is time for a new patriotism to arise, one which means allegiance to a country and its people in a way that does not require our supporting a bad government.
The pen is indeed mighty, but if it is left broken and unused then we have no defense from the sword.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
