[FRIAM] Is the American political system broken?

[Steve Smith]

> 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?

Pieter -

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?

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 /Borgen/ 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".

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.

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.

     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.

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.

     The major downsides I consider have a lot to do with "/how do we 
get there from here?/" 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).

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.

Ramble,

  - Steve

>
> 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.
>
> To educate myself I asked Bing AI to write three essays:
> a) One for Andrew Yang's views
> b) One against it
> c) Lastly an objective review of the two views above
>
> Bing AI answered with:
> 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:
>
> a) Essay for Andrew Yang's view:
>
> 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.
>
> 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:
>
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - 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.
>
> 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.
>
> b) Essay against Andrew Yang's view:
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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:
>
> - 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.
> - Open primaries could undermine party cohesion and identity, as well 
> as allow for strategic voting and manipulation by opposing parties or 
> factions.
> - Term limits for Congress could reduce institutional knowledge and 
> expertise, as well as increase dependence on staff and lobbyists.
> - Universal basic income could create disincentives for work and 
> productivity, as well as increase government spending and debt.
> - Reforming the electoral college could weaken federalism and state 
> sovereignty, as well as increase regional polarization and alienation.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> c) Objective review of the two views above:
>
> 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.
>
> 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:
>
> - 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.
> - 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.
> - 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.
>
> 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.
>
> Source: Conversation with Bing, 2023/09/03
> (1) Andrew Yang's Forward Political Party Views, Explained - Market 
> Realist. 
> https://marketrealist.com/economy-and-politics/andrew-yang-political-party-explained/.
> (2) What does Andrew Yang believe? Where the candidate stands on 5 
> issues - PBS. 
> https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-does-andrew-yang-believe-where-the-candidate-stands-on-5-issues.
> (3) Andrew Yang’s Disjointed Plan to Reform American Democracy. 
> https://newrepublic.com/article/153888/andrew-yangs-disjointed-plan-reform-american-democracy.
> (4) Andrew Yang’s Third-Party Aspirations | The New Yorker. 
> https://www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/andrew-yangs-third-party-aspirations.
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>    1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20230903/82702c88/attachment.html>