Taking Back Our Delusional Democracy: part 2

So I finally finished Joel Hirschhorn’s Delusional Democracy a few weeks ago. Been trying to synthesize it. Essentially his plan for returning democracy to the United States involves launching a third party into existence—with a platform of returning government to the people. This, in his view, has the potential of uniting the underrepresented ( most of us) on both right and left, or to use his terminology, Delusional Patriots (right) and Depressed Dissidents (left). Then, once this third party becomes politically effective, he has a long list of procedural reforms which, if taken together, he believes would return our system to one which has at least the capacity to reflect the will of the people. These have to do with things like campaign finance reform, ballot box initiatives, voting rules, referendum etc. This initial agenda is followed by a long list of structural changes which reflect a huge conceptual shift away from corporatist supremacy and corruption. So in essence the plan for change requires significant changes to have taken place in our hearts and minds already.  He believes that clearing away our mental resistance to  the reality of how bad things have gotten will turn Depressed Dissidents into Risk Taking Activist Dissidents.

Sadly, I don’t think this is actually true.  Facts, no matter how convincingly put, rarely inspire people to risk taking action.  And this book has a few too many ideas to be truly convincing at an emotional level.  It lacks a clear and simple call to action–it requires those who accept his basic message to analyze, synthesize and formulate plans of action.  While this may be the most functionally appropriate approach to the problem, I doubt there are many willing and able to wade through this and work towards what he recommends.  I do, however recommend the book. I think Mr. Hirschhorn is probably a libertarian.  He has a really negative position on illegal immigration which is at odds with my thoughts, and he tends to use the term “deMOCKracy” which I found annoying. But it is definitely worth reading—if for no other reason than I want some other people to discuss it with me:). I have to admit I was a bit disappointed. Not that I think he is entirely wrong, mind you. But because I was really hoping for something a bit more accessible from where we are. It reminds me of other idealist visions—too distant from reality to be an actual achievable plan. At least for the moment. Or perhaps I am just disappointed because what he is proposing is so hard, and will take so long, and has so many moving parts, and most of the functional parts are procedural details which would be difficult to sell to most audiences……perhaps I’m just lazy?

I was looking for a framework which would allow those of us who are waking up to the wreckage of our democracy to take on a bit of activism without having to build the whole plan from the ground up. Even broken down into steps, the barriers to entry are pretty high. The precedent of launching a third party which unites the viewers of Fox with the viewers of Rachel Maddow and Jon Stewart—that is a big hurdle in my mind. Viewed in economic terms, this plan of Hirschhorn’s has clear, high, short term costs, and vague, diffuse long term benefits—which any economist will tell you is a nearly impossible sell politically. The herd nearly always opts for clear short term benefits and diffuse long term costs. A big mistake if you want a healthy and stable system, but we have been trained to be short sighted for several generations. Our culture of consumption and selfish individualism has weakened us so much that civic action is the purview only of those who feel equally threatened and capable of effecting change. A pretty small group. Most of the people I know are concerned about what is happening to their country—many are anxious and angry—but few feel truly threatened enough to do anything about it. And those who do feel desperately threatened are so busy trying to survive that they have no time or energy to pursue democratic goals. Unless they are clear, short term, understandable and cheap. Which is why I think protest actions like US Uncut have more potential for the moment—more on that later.

Of course the overall long term benefit of political agency is huge, but if there were a massive effort starting today to implement Hirschhorn’s plan, we might see some changes perhaps ten years down the road. I don’t feel like we have that long before our country is so hollowed out that violence will come to the streets.

Now, I do like the idea of promoting a third party on a “take back our country” platform. And I do appreciate that such a platform has the potential of uniting the middle class where issues like abortion and gay marriage divide.   As Hirschhorn points out, while Delusional Patriots and Depressed Dissidents certainly have divergent views on many contemporary issues, at a deeper level we share principles and aspirations. So I definitely think the idea warrants discussion and exploration amongst those of us who hope to gain some agency in a political system which has been stolen from the people. So, lets talk about it. Questions? Thoughts?

0

0