The Archdruid Pans the American Political Process
Primary tabs
Pans it down to its nuts and bolts, in fact. At least the modern ones. A broad criticism of political primaries, and a celebration of caucuses, follows:
More generally, it’s fair to say that very few of the significant political leaders of American history between Jackson’s time and the beginning of the 1960s could get elected in today’s money-driven environment. If we’re going to have a corrupt political system—and we are; no political system anywhere will ever be more honest than the people it governs—we might as well have one that produces leaders more capable than the airbrushed marionettes who infest the American political scene these days.
I can always count on him to introduce me to a perspective I'd not before encountered, and to argue for it persuasively. I'd not before heard the history of the caucus system, or its effects on the political life of most Americans, but now I'm left wondering just how great primaries are, after all.
- jumpjet's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Ha! Beat Me to It!
Woke up at 2am and read this piece by The Archdruid and was going to write a piece on my experiences in Iowa caucuses. Yes, he gave me a new perspective not only on how the caucus system might be better than the primaries. But he also gave me a new perspective on how maybe the old way of picking Senators might have been better too. I love the idea of street smarts kind of corruption and big money kind of corruption.
I urge everybody to read the whole thing. My first caucus was in Iowa in 2004 as an observer on the Edwards campaign. It was one of those iconic Iowa farmhouse ones you always hear about. Edwards people were in the Living Room. Kerry people in the dining room a few feet away. Dean in the kitchen and Kucinich,etc in the Hallway. If the candidate didn't have enough people then the others could persuade them. I told the Kucinich guy that I had instructions that the Kucinich vote should go to Edwards. He didn't quite believe me so I gave him a number to call. When he did, then he came over to Edwards. Oh, and of course, lots of homemade cookies.
The 2nd time was in a very crowded school in southeastern Des Moines and it was a zoo. The Obama people were very loud and intimidating and managed to get most of the Biden and Dodd people. The Hilary people were polite and had food. Loudness won the day.
My impression was that the party machine in these caucus states can put a lot of pressure on the faithful who show up. I thought that a bad thing until reading this article. I experienced a lot of bullying in our state convention too. Actually arm twisting and shouting. I was shocked by it, but vowed that if I ever participated again I would bring the gun to the knife fight. I would never been unprepared for the brawl.
After a lot of thought, I don't want to have anything to do with caucuses or primaries. I was a delegate to Boston and it was a real crap experience that all my friends keep urging me to write about. Maybe I'll start today.
Feel free to make your own post.
I'd really love all the details you can muster about your experience at the caucuses, primaries, and conventions. I went to my county Democratic convention as a delegate in 2008, when I was a hardcore Obot, but that's the extent of my participation in what's left of party machinery.
Here’s how it worked. Party
Here’s how it worked. Party caucuses existed in every urban neighborhood, small town, and rural center, and their activities were not limited to one meeting every four years; they met regularly, as often as once a week, to talk politics and keep party members informed of what was going on in local, state, and national affairs.
actually, it's still happening this way.
the problem is that fewer and fewer people are participating in the process. why? i'd venture to guess that the two most likely reasons are (1) that the primaries are staggered instead of all on the same day (it's not the voting method, it's when you vote) and (2) making local elections nonpartisan (how are you going to build parties at the local level if they can't wield power at the local level?)
Refusing to vote is logical.
I think a lot of people have stopped voting because of a logical belief that the system is rigged. At the local level of the school board, water board or city council that is not so true. But at the state or federal level it's totally broken, there aren't really meaningful choices. This is especially true at the Presidential level. So why should people participate?
In one of his essays, Vaclav Havel talks about how refusing to vote in the fixed Czech elections was one way of living in truth. I'm inclined to agree.