The original cause of social change is the same cause of almost all publicly initiated political change: Unfulfilled needs of individuals and the public. Matters are made far worse when it appears that there is no hope of their needs being fulfilled due to the intransigent nature of their government. Then the right of self-determination by one becomes the right of self-determination by the many who have no legitimate empowerment to effectively participate in established political processes.
In a democratic nation, where the right of self-determination by its citizens has become a part of their cultural heritage and way of life for centuries, and where there is no adequate democratic process for individuals, their communities and their national society to share their preferences and opinions, and where their elected and appointed public executives do not solicit those preferences and opinions, surely that situation becomes more dire with each passing decade.
What once satisfied the political needs of our grandparents for a democratic political process now has almost no relevance to democratic citizens when they have the ability to share their opinions and preferences on a daily basis via the Internet with companies that actively seek their opinions and preferences in order to improve their service and product delivery to their customers and clientele. Shouldn’t democratic governments do the same?
Whatever re-design we choose must:
1) “fit” into the Constitutional framework of our nation;
2) recover the quality-value relationship that citizens had with their congressional public executives before it vanished with the Apportionment Act of 1911;
3) become a democratic evolutionary development to bridge the democratic tragedy that the Apportionment Act created; and,
4) offer an inventive way to engage contemporary technologies to give citizens a means of offering their collective intelligence (think in terms of “knowledge workers” in high tech industries) to create a “trend” of consensus to share with their public executives.
Yes, these suggestions do race ahead of the reality of the contemporary social, political, and economic situation in all mature democratic nations, but they confidently point the way to the peaceful evolution of democratic societies to move toward social stability and peace that will eventually lead to social sustainability. Pragmatically, it will take no less than 30-70% of Congressional district populations [735,000 p/district] or 220,500 – 441,000 to sign a petition to overturn/amend the Reapportionment Act of 1911. Sounds impossible, huh? Yet, we know what social media can do.
5) What could a public (political) media site do if it were designed using the socially sustainable values of our species as the criteria for its construction and operation?
In a democratic nation, where the right of self-determination by its citizens has become a part of their cultural heritage and way of life for centuries, and where there is no adequate democratic process for individuals, their communities and their national society to share their preferences and opinions, and where their elected and appointed public executives do not solicit those preferences and opinions, surely that situation becomes more dire with each passing decade.
What once satisfied the political needs of our grandparents for a democratic political process now has almost no relevance to democratic citizens when they have the ability to share their opinions and preferences on a daily basis via the Internet with companies that actively seek their opinions and preferences in order to improve their service and product delivery to their customers and clientele. Shouldn’t democratic governments do the same?
Whatever re-design we choose must:
1) “fit” into the Constitutional framework of our nation;
2) recover the quality-value relationship that citizens had with their congressional public executives before it vanished with the Apportionment Act of 1911;
3) become a democratic evolutionary development to bridge the democratic tragedy that the Apportionment Act created; and,
4) offer an inventive way to engage contemporary technologies to give citizens a means of offering their collective intelligence (think in terms of “knowledge workers” in high tech industries) to create a “trend” of consensus to share with their public executives.
Yes, these suggestions do race ahead of the reality of the contemporary social, political, and economic situation in all mature democratic nations, but they confidently point the way to the peaceful evolution of democratic societies to move toward social stability and peace that will eventually lead to social sustainability. Pragmatically, it will take no less than 30-70% of Congressional district populations [735,000 p/district] or 220,500 – 441,000 to sign a petition to overturn/amend the Reapportionment Act of 1911. Sounds impossible, huh? Yet, we know what social media can do.
5) What could a public (political) media site do if it were designed using the socially sustainable values of our species as the criteria for its construction and operation?