<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPerSOL_EYPS+Q8mtGoubzcMPKQ6d4Qrf6=kOokW9wVauRt7cQ@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">I'm not an American, but because America plays such
a big role in the world, I do follow what's happening over
there. With the presidential elections happening next year, I
cringe at the prospect that it will be another Trump vs. Biden
affair. Can the leader of the world not do better?<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>Pieter -</p>
<p>I appreciate the international parallax that Friam (sometimes)
offers such as yours here. I'd be interested in a little more of
your own analysis based on your personal socio-economic-political
position as well as your cultural heritage and of course your
geopolitical positioning which is rather unique in the world
(South Africa). ChatGPT's perspective is naturally pretty
generic/muddy and from a median/centroid POV by it's nature?<br>
</p>
<p>Regarding Yang and his movement: I was definitely fascinated by
his ideas and positioning across the US Democratic party
presidential primary (2020)... my personal opinion is that a
significant value of presidential primaries is to develop a more
diverse/interesting platform than the one in place under (any)
current administration. We have just finished watching Netflix's
<i>Borgen</i> which I highly recommend as an accessible (and I
hope accurate) presentation of how (Northern?) European
Parliamentary systems operate. To move from our system to a
parliamentary alternative is a much bigger step than anything Yang
suggests and therefore likely more inaccessable across the
"semi-adjacent possible".</p>
<p>Two-Party: I am a big fan of finding a way to expand our
degenerate two-party system but am not sure that any specific
naive attempt to break it will not have some possibly signfiicant
unintended (undesireable) consequences. I *like* the idea of
ranked choice voting (as a voter) to be able to more directly
express my preferences and in an ideal(ish) world, to achieve a
more representative result. A *full* rank-choice allows me to
(implicitly) express my never-X-er sentiments which is satisfying
(if not particularly meaningful?). I voted for Jill/Green in
2016 because I strongly believed that Blue/Hillary/Dems had a
lockin in my state and it was intended to be a combination of
"protest" against the Clinton dynasty and the two-party system.
It turned out fine but it could have been a bit of complicity
accidentally being a "spoiler" vote.</p>
<p>Universal Basic: I am very split on this concept. To the
extent that I think we are a hyper-wealthy economy (US and the
rest of the first world at least) I believe we *can* afford this,
and there are good reasons it *might* be a very good idea (up to
details). I feel that we do have some precedents in smaller
contexts such as the Alaskan Oil&Gas payments and various
Native Tribe member-payments. I think our (sometimes)
liberal/generous disability and welfare systems might well be
partially replaced by a UBI... allowing some of those who might
be *gaming* the systems to simply accept the same (or even
diminished) level of support as an act of generosity or inclusion
by others who are more engaged in the directly productive
subsystems/activities. I also think this is a good way to support
more "seeking your bliss" (e.g. artists and poets and ... doing
their thing with less threshold/resistance) as well as
entrepreneurial activiites. A UBI might allow *some*
entrepreneurs/innovators to build up more
technological/innovational momentum... I *do* believe that the
more extreme implementation of communism/socialism give us
anecdotal evidence of how it can also go bad.<br>
</p>
<p> Regarding Term Limits... I'm sympathetic with the idea that
sometimes "career politicians" are a real problem/scourge (the
alligators in the swamp) but I do appreciate at least a few of the
"career" politicians of note (e.g. Sanders, Warren, Whitehouse,
even Biden) and loathe a few others (Grassley, McConnell,
Thurmond... as I understand the intention/operation of the
House/Senate... I think long-tenure Senators make more sense even
though some of the fossils in those roles can be acute problems
for our process.</p>
<p>Open Primaries and Electoral College issues are also important
but maybe lost among the other issues. I have not ever voted in
a primary because I have never registered in a party (protest
primarily against 2-party system and "not wanting to encourage the
bastards"). That said I *would* have liked to have thrown down
for Bernie in 2016 and 2020 primaries and came close to
registering Blue/Dem to do so but ("don't want to encourage the
bastards"). I think the Electoral College is a very high profile
but idiosyncratic version of the more general problem of
Gerrymandering that goes with representative gov/voting. I hope
the EC is on it's way out but I suspect the path *to* that
elimination is awkward and risk-strewn. <br>
</p>
<p> The major downsides I consider have a lot to do with "<i>how
do we get there from here?</i>" and the risk of perturbations
having unintended consequences which brings us back to "nudge"
theory, encouraging very small, incremental adoptions. I think
Yang is *deliberately* naive or over-simplifying and if he were
actually given some reins to control this runaway stagecoach of
fools that we are, he would be more thoughtful and restrained than
implied by some of his more strong proposals (for
rhetorical/political purposes).</p>
<p>In any case, I think his "voice" has been important as one of the
stronger outliers (including Pete Buttegeig, Marianne Williamson
and Tulsi Gabbard) and welcome his continued efforts even if they
fail to get immediate/direct traction.<br>
</p>
<p>Ramble,</p>
<p> - Steve<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAPerSOL_EYPS+Q8mtGoubzcMPKQ6d4Qrf6=kOokW9wVauRt7cQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
During the primaries of the last election, Andrew Yang intrigued
me to no end. He did not make it as a candidate for the
Democratic Party and subsequently formed a new party. He is now
an outspoken critic of the American political system and has
some proposals on how to fix it.<br>
<br>
To educate myself I asked Bing AI to write three essays:<br>
a) One for Andrew Yang's views<br>
b) One against it<br>
c) Lastly an objective review of the two views above<br>
<br>
Bing AI answered with:<br>
I'm glad you're interested in learning more about Andrew Yang's
view on the American political system. I can help you write
three essays based on the information I found from the web. Here
they are:<br>
<br>
a) Essay for Andrew Yang's view:<br>
<br>
Andrew Yang is a former presidential and mayoral candidate who
has recently launched a new political party called Forward (or
FWD). Yang believes that the American political system is broken
and needs to be reformed to reduce polarization, corruption, and
dysfunction. He argues that the current two-party system is
outdated and does not represent the interests of most Americans,
who are increasingly dissatisfied with both Democrats and
Republicans. He also claims that the system is rigged by special
interests, lobbyists, and wealthy donors who influence the
policies and outcomes of elections.<br>
<br>
Yang's solution is to create a third party that is focused on
moving the country forward, rather than left or right. He
proposes a set of reforms that he thinks will improve the
quality of democracy and governance in the U.S. Some of these
reforms include:<br>
<br>
- Implementing ranked-choice voting, which allows voters to rank
candidates in order of preference, rather than choosing only
one. This would encourage more diversity and competition in the
political arena, and reduce the spoiler effect and negative
campaigning.<br>
- Adopting open primaries, which allow voters to participate in
any party's primary election, regardless of their affiliation.
This would increase voter turnout and engagement, and give more
voice and power to independent and moderate voters.<br>
- Enacting term limits for Congress, which would limit the
number of terms that members of the House and Senate can serve.
This would reduce the influence of career politicians and
lobbyists, and encourage more fresh and innovative ideas and
perspectives.<br>
- Creating a universal basic income (UBI), which would provide
every American adult with a monthly payment of $1,000,
regardless of their income or employment status. This would help
alleviate poverty, inequality, and insecurity, and boost the
economy and consumer spending.<br>
- Reforming the electoral college, which would either abolish or
modify the system that determines the winner of presidential
elections based on state-level votes, rather than popular votes.
This would make every vote count equally, and prevent scenarios
where a candidate can win the presidency without winning the
majority of votes.<br>
<br>
Yang believes that these reforms will create a more responsive,
representative, and accountable political system that will serve
the common good of all Americans. He hopes that his new party
will attract voters from across the political spectrum who are
looking for a positive and pragmatic alternative to the status
quo.<br>
<br>
b) Essay against Andrew Yang's view:<br>
<br>
Andrew Yang is a former presidential and mayoral candidate who
has recently launched a new political party called Forward (or
FWD). Yang claims that the American political system is broken
and needs to be reformed to reduce polarization, corruption, and
dysfunction. However, his view is misguided and unrealistic for
several reasons.<br>
<br>
First, Yang's diagnosis of the problem is oversimplified and
exaggerated. He blames the two-party system for all the ills of
American politics, but ignores the fact that there are many
other factors that contribute to the challenges facing the
country, such as social media, misinformation, cultural
differences, economic forces, global events, etc. He also fails
to acknowledge the benefits and achievements of the two-party
system, such as its stability, adaptability, accountability, and
responsiveness to public opinion.<br>
<br>
Second, Yang's solution is impractical and ineffective. He
proposes a set of reforms that he thinks will improve the
quality of democracy and governance in the U.S., but does not
explain how he will implement them or overcome the resistance
from the existing parties and institutions. He also does not
address the potential drawbacks and unintended consequences of
his reforms, such as:<br>
<br>
- Ranked-choice voting could lead to more confusion and
complexity for voters and election officials, as well as more
legal challenges and disputes over vote counting and results.<br>
- Open primaries could undermine party cohesion and identity, as
well as allow for strategic voting and manipulation by opposing
parties or factions.<br>
- Term limits for Congress could reduce institutional knowledge
and expertise, as well as increase dependence on staff and
lobbyists.<br>
- Universal basic income could create disincentives for work and
productivity, as well as increase government spending and debt.<br>
- Reforming the electoral college could weaken federalism and
state sovereignty, as well as increase regional polarization and
alienation.<br>
<br>
Yang's new party is unlikely to succeed or make a significant
impact on American politics. He faces many obstacles and
challenges in building a viable third party that can compete
with the established parties, such as fundraising, organizing,
recruiting candidates, gaining media attention, attracting
voters, etc. He also risks splitting or diluting the vote of his
supporters or allies in other parties, which could benefit his
opponents or adversaries.<br>
<br>
Yang's view on the American political system is based on wishful
thinking and naive optimism. He does not offer a realistic or
effective way to address the complex and multifaceted issues
facing the country.<br>
<br>
c) Objective review of the two views above:<br>
<br>
Andrew Yang is a former presidential and mayoral candidate who
has recently launched a new political party called Forward (or
FWD). Yang has a view that the American political system is
broken and needs to be reformed to reduce polarization,
corruption, and dysfunction. He proposes a set of reforms that
he thinks will improve the quality of democracy and governance
in the U.S., such as ranked-choice voting, open primaries, term
limits for Congress, universal basic income, and reforming the
electoral college. He hopes that his new party will attract
voters from across the political spectrum who are looking for a
positive and pragmatic alternative to the status quo.<br>
<br>
However, Yang's view is not universally accepted or supported.
There are many arguments and counterarguments for and against
his view and his reforms. Some of the main points of contention
are:<br>
<br>
- The causes and extent of the problem: Yang blames the
two-party system for all the ills of American politics, but
others point out that there are many other factors that
contribute to the challenges facing the country, such as social
media, misinformation, cultural differences, economic forces,
global events, etc. They also argue that the two-party system
has some benefits and achievements, such as its stability,
adaptability, accountability, and responsiveness to public
opinion.<br>
- The feasibility and effectiveness of the solution: Yang
proposes a set of reforms that he thinks will improve the
quality of democracy and governance in the U.S., but others
question how he will implement them or overcome the resistance
from the existing parties and institutions. They also warn of
the potential drawbacks and unintended consequences of his
reforms, such as confusion, complexity, legal challenges, party
fragmentation, strategic voting, loss of institutional
knowledge, dependence on staff and lobbyists, disincentives for
work, increased government spending and debt, weakened
federalism and state sovereignty, increased regional
polarization and alienation, etc.<br>
- The viability and impact of the new party: Yang hopes that his
new party will succeed or make a significant impact on American
politics, but others doubt his ability to build a viable third
party that can compete with the established parties. They cite
the many obstacles and challenges he faces in fundraising,
organizing, recruiting candidates, gaining media attention,
attracting voters, etc. They also caution that he risks
splitting or diluting the vote of his supporters or allies in
other parties, which could benefit his opponents or adversaries.<br>
<br>
In conclusion, Andrew Yang's view on the American political
system is a controversial and contentious one. There are pros
and cons to his view and his reforms. There are also
uncertainties and risks to his new party. The debate over his
view is likely to continue as he pursues his political
aspirations.<br>
<br>
Source: Conversation with Bing, 2023/09/03<br>
(1) Andrew Yang's Forward Political Party Views, Explained -
Market Realist. <a
href="https://marketrealist.com/economy-and-politics/andrew-yang-political-party-explained/"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://marketrealist.com/economy-and-politics/andrew-yang-political-party-explained/</a>.<br>
(2) What does Andrew Yang believe? Where the candidate stands on
5 issues - PBS. <a
href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-does-andrew-yang-believe-where-the-candidate-stands-on-5-issues"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-does-andrew-yang-believe-where-the-candidate-stands-on-5-issues</a>.<br>
(3) Andrew Yang’s Disjointed Plan to Reform American Democracy.
<a
href="https://newrepublic.com/article/153888/andrew-yangs-disjointed-plan-reform-american-democracy"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://newrepublic.com/article/153888/andrew-yangs-disjointed-plan-reform-american-democracy</a>.<br>
(4) Andrew Yang’s Third-Party Aspirations | The New Yorker. <a
href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/andrew-yangs-third-party-aspirations"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/andrew-yangs-third-party-aspirations</a>.<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://bit.ly/virtualfriam">https://bit.ly/virtualfriam</a>
to (un)subscribe <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a>
archives: 5/2017 thru present <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/">https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/</a>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/">http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>