Political Forums and the Changing Face of Democracy

Unless you’ve been living the last decade under a very large and weighty rock, there’s no way you’ve failed to notice that in a thousand different ways, the internet has changed pretty much everything about the way we live, work, and communicate with each other.

The rise of political forums on the net has, and is continuing to change the face of, and in fact, the very nature of democracy itself.

Some of these changes are for good, and others for ill, but that fact that it’s happening is undeniable. We’ll take a look at a few of the ways things are changing, try to shed at least a ray of light on the subject of political forums in general, then invite you to participate in our own political forums, right here on the site.

On the plus side, the biggest gain that the ordinary citizen sees, courtesy of political forums he or she may frequent is that politics has become more accessible and more personal than it has been since the Greek Polis’ first experimented with the concept.

In those days of course, the immediacy, accessibility, and “personal-ness” of democracy stemmed from the fact that the city states tended to be relatively small, and the policy matters discussed often concerned matters of immediate survival for these relatively isolated political units (what neighboring city-states to ally with, which rivals to attack, matters of trade, military service, etc…all of these were much more transparent to, and bore a much more personal and immediate effect for the ancient Greeks than they do for us today, where many of these things exist in our minds only as abstract concepts).

All that to say that while there are some parallels between the political forums attended by the ancient Greeks, and the virtual political forums that the masses are flocking to today, there are also some fundamental differences.

It is all very well that politics in general are a lot more accessible to the common man now, than they ever were before, but unfortunately, this is (or can be) something of a two-edged sword, because a little bit of knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Through the ages, political forums of all types have, of course, been center stage for all manner of pundits and egoists, looking to sway the masses for their own ends, and this is certainly as true today as it was in our ancient past. One key difference here though, is that while the political forums of yesteryear saw their members all drawn from a relatively homogenous (and rather smallish) population, today’s popular political forums are massive things, and cater to a large, ever-changing, incredibly diverse population of participants. This being the case, of course it naturally follows that there’s a much broader spectrum of political belief to be found within the confines of one of our modern political forum than would have even been conceivable in the forums of old, and this, coupled with the anonymity that our modern political forums provide (ancient democracy was very much an “in-your-face” affair) opens the door for a great deal of verbal viciousness.

This is not to say that our forefathers did not have their fair share of vile, mud-slinging debates. They most certainly did, but these tended to be the exceptions, rather than the rule (and this is the reason they stand out so colorfully against the backdrop of the greater bulk of those ancient political debates). Contrast that with conversations in today’s political forums, where the battle lines are drawn going in (typically along Conservative vs. Liberal lines), and the debates get heated almost from the outset, and more often than not, quickly degenerate into mindless mud-slinging, with no one really remembering what the original debate topic actually was.

The second major negative to be found in today’s political forums is the fact that demagogues have access to a vast population of easily convinced, easily led people. This has literally launched a number of careers, and has led to some unfortunate consequences, with popular talk show hosts essentially supplanting the elected political leadership when it comes to creating policy planks and talking points. This is a danger to guard against not because the cult personalities are inherently bad people…the author makes no judgment either way. Simply that they’re not the elected representatives, and their undue influence over the masses is ANYTHING but democratic, but that is a whole different debate, and a topic for another time. Perhaps even a good topic for discussion on our own political forums, which you are cordially invited to join!

-=Vel=-
UVent Forums

Political Debate – Where Has All the Civility Gone?

There was a day when political debate carried with it the notion of civility. That it was possible to hold a political debate with a rival (even one from the opposite side of the political landscape) and hold an issues-driven conversation. Impassioned, certainly, but it used to be possible to hold a passionate conversation on any topic (political debate or otherwise) without seeing it devolve into mud slinging and name calling. Without seeing the parties from both sides stomp off in frustration and disgust, absolutely convinced that the person on the other side of the debate is a first rate moron (in the best case), or a traitorous enemy of his country (in the worst).

To say that this situation is not conducive to CONSTRUCTIVE political debate is understatement at its most sublime, and I would contend that it is, in fact, the key ingredient that is paralyzing the nation and making any kind of “meeting in the middle” absolutely impossible.

Our current president (Obama) said as much during his first meeting with congressional republicans, telling them that because they, and their talk-show-host idols who have been allowed to essentially dictate policy for the republican party, have so demonized the left…have painted them with such a starkly evil brush that it makes any sort of compromise position with them an impossibility, and because of that, we wind up with an exceedingly polarized position. Two camps with opposite views on what the way forward should look like, and both sides have so demonized the other than it would be political suicide to reach out to them and make a compromise.

Because of that, no compromise is ever reached (witness the doings of the self-described “Party of No”), political discourse resembles honest political debate less and less, becoming all the more divisive, and creating a vicious circle that cannot have a good ending for ‘We, the People.’

The only solution to this is to admit that both sides have mischaracterized their opponents. That neither side is bent on destroying the nation, and that both sides have something to offer to the political debate, should we ever reach the point that we can say that word and have it mean something besides ‘shouting match that happens to be about politics.’

There must be at least a measure of civility present for political debate to even take place.

We don’t have to agree with each other. Hell, we don’t even have to like each other, but we should be able to listen to each other’s ideas and gain something from them without branding the other side as a traitor to his nation, mentally deficient, or unworthy to live here.

If we can’t do at least that, then how can we honestly say we are participating in political debate at all? How can we honestly say we are deserving of the legacy that our founding fathers have left us?

Here are a fistful of policy changes I support. I am sure that these will make excellent fodder for political debate, and welcome any of our readers to open threads in the forums relating to any of these they’d care to discuss or debate further.

Energy Policy:
Always a source of excellent political debate, and it may surprise many uber-conservative readers (who no doubt view this as being a member of the family of liberal blogs), but I support the “Drill, baby, drill!” paradigm. Sure. Absolutely. Allow offshore drilling but inform drillers that they will be held 125% liable for any damages done. We’ll use the surplus to help retire debt. Levy a 1 cent per gallon, 10 cent per ton tax on gas/coal. Use these funds to subsidize alt. Energy infrastructure, with a focus on solar and wind, and a lesser focus on bio-D (split the funds roughly 40/40/20 in those three areas). Enable a government profit sharing plan with regards to profits gained from oil harvested from federal lands (ANWAR, The Gulf, etc). Let’s do it, starting today.

Ethics:
This one’s easy, but my position here will no doubt anger people on both sides of the political spectrum and I’m sure this one will be excellent fodder for an ongoing political debate. I’ve not seen too many people on either conservative OR liberal blogs talking much about matters of ethics, but as I see it, this is sorta paving the road. Taking on this issue will make tackling many of the others our nation faces worlds easier, so here’s what I think we ought to do:

No lobbyists allowed within 500 miles of Washington DC. Make it a Federal crime to give any politician, or any staffer WORKING FOR a politician a “gift” of any size whatsoever. Cap donations to political campaigns at $100 per person, PERIOD. Corporations or other organizations are disallowed from giving AT ALL. See? Told you it was inflammatory. And excellent kindling for all manner of colorful political debates!

Changes in law regarding Corporations:
Conservatives will no doubt want to flay me alive for these, and I suspect that this short paragraph alone will be enough for them to forever condemn this site as being among the family of “commie” liberal blogs, but again, in the interest of sparking a lively political debate, I’ll put my ideas “out there,” and see what happens:

I believe strongly in increased regulations in nearly every aspect of corporate life. Contractually obligate them to be good community citizens, since the vast majority seem utterly incapable of doing it on their own. Laws to force full accountability on them. Shut down tax loopholes, stop all corporate welfare (as above, see the exception where fostering native renewable energy sources are concerned), corporations ARE NOT people, and should no longer be considered as such, and money should no longer be considered a form of speech.

Sound off! If you have something to say about anything you’ve read here, then we invite you to participate in our political forums!