As frustration with the political process grows, and more extreme voices demand ever-more-radical change, one UMW professor's approach to problem solving is showing a more effective path forward.
"Democracy, it seems, does still work — when we embrace the civics lesson Tippet is offering, and trust the process."
Once again, a simplistic solution to a complex problem. Kumbaya, Michael row your boat ashore.
Yes, by all means, a practical means - but with a couple of givens that do not always apply, particularly in today's day and age. And are treating a symptom, while studiously ignoring the primary cause.
The givens. That we can all work together toward a beneficial goal. Yet it ignores some things. What if one side of the debate sees remaining in the debate stage AS the solution? They are not negotiating in good faith, but merely looking to use the process as a means of delay?
When one side - whether it be the tobacco industry, coal mine owners, pharmaceutical company, or in this case - a developer - or whoever it is who has a vested interest in blocking change is participating not to find a resolution, but to block a resolution.
What then?
Particularly when they are doing so, not as people, who can be arrested, have handcuffs placed on them, or be criminally liable - but rather are that false construct, a corporation - which according to our Republican Supreme Court - has all of the rights of a person, but none of the criminal responsibility - and can use money which is now classified as speech. And their goals are specifically to generate profit for shareholders with the least amount of cost without being locked up.
What then?
I would posit that too many of our "problems" come back to that basic process. Healthcare with gargantuan costs yet poor results.
Where your solution when Clay Jones has a stroke is not to question why we, the only one of the 32 richest OECD countries on this planet without guaranteed healthcare do not have guaranteed healthcare - but rather to urge us to contribute to a Go Fund Me page, because he's a great guy?
Not saying he isn't a great guy. But rather to question, as I suspect he would - based upon his drawings that I follow on bluesky, why that is our system?
Should he, or anyone else be reduced to begging in a Darwinian system of The Apprentice, where his rehab, housing, or family security is based upon how popular he is, how many friends, or how popular his views?
Someone said the other day that "charity" - like the soon to be upcoming celebration of our annual "giving" of a good meal at Thanksgiving to the homeless, is not really something to be celebrated.
But is rather an acknowledgement that we, as a society, have chosen - thorough our electoral choices to live in a society where we accept our citizens and their children not having the basic needs of survival.
Can't we do better?
Is contributing and celebrating such things helping, or merely perpetuating injustice, shortsightedness, and cruelty by pretending we don't?
I don't know the answers, but I sure wish we'd start asking instead of offering up placebos such as this as the solution.
And here - talking about bringing local stakeholders together to find a solution - yet ignoring the underlying cause. Someone is burning coal to the west of us, for profit - and we are suffering a cost as a result.
Why do we accept a system which allows that? Shouldn't capitalism be honest?
Rather than demanding these disparate groups come together and figure out how to bear the costs of mitigation - which again, is laudable; wouldn't it be wiser and more sustainable to demand better from those causing the harm?
Why are we not even allowed to ask? Or for that matter, demand? In a system where any legislator who does ask is attacked by lobbyists with unlimited power.
Again - you focus on the tree in front of you and ignore the forest.
In this particular instance - there are solutions. RGGI is a good example. One that was suspended by Virginia's Republican Party. It only addressed part of the harms, yet it was a start. Until they squashed it.
Will it be back? It should.
If you want honest capitalism - that creates a fair playing field between those making the money, and those bearing the costs - we need fundamental changes in our system.
Let's start with honest, fair, just competition - where all are welcome to make a profit, but not without accounting for the harms incurred in the process - not one that expects the ones incurring the harm to spend all of their energies figuring out the best way to clean up the mess caused by others.
Just some thoughts.... and I hope Mr Jones does well.
"Democracy, it seems, does still work — when we embrace the civics lesson Tippet is offering, and trust the process."
Once again, a simplistic solution to a complex problem. Kumbaya, Michael row your boat ashore.
Yes, by all means, a practical means - but with a couple of givens that do not always apply, particularly in today's day and age. And are treating a symptom, while studiously ignoring the primary cause.
The givens. That we can all work together toward a beneficial goal. Yet it ignores some things. What if one side of the debate sees remaining in the debate stage AS the solution? They are not negotiating in good faith, but merely looking to use the process as a means of delay?
When one side - whether it be the tobacco industry, coal mine owners, pharmaceutical company, or in this case - a developer - or whoever it is who has a vested interest in blocking change is participating not to find a resolution, but to block a resolution.
What then?
Particularly when they are doing so, not as people, who can be arrested, have handcuffs placed on them, or be criminally liable - but rather are that false construct, a corporation - which according to our Republican Supreme Court - has all of the rights of a person, but none of the criminal responsibility - and can use money which is now classified as speech. And their goals are specifically to generate profit for shareholders with the least amount of cost without being locked up.
What then?
I would posit that too many of our "problems" come back to that basic process. Healthcare with gargantuan costs yet poor results.
Where your solution when Clay Jones has a stroke is not to question why we, the only one of the 32 richest OECD countries on this planet without guaranteed healthcare do not have guaranteed healthcare - but rather to urge us to contribute to a Go Fund Me page, because he's a great guy?
Not saying he isn't a great guy. But rather to question, as I suspect he would - based upon his drawings that I follow on bluesky, why that is our system?
Should he, or anyone else be reduced to begging in a Darwinian system of The Apprentice, where his rehab, housing, or family security is based upon how popular he is, how many friends, or how popular his views?
Someone said the other day that "charity" - like the soon to be upcoming celebration of our annual "giving" of a good meal at Thanksgiving to the homeless, is not really something to be celebrated.
But is rather an acknowledgement that we, as a society, have chosen - thorough our electoral choices to live in a society where we accept our citizens and their children not having the basic needs of survival.
Can't we do better?
Is contributing and celebrating such things helping, or merely perpetuating injustice, shortsightedness, and cruelty by pretending we don't?
I don't know the answers, but I sure wish we'd start asking instead of offering up placebos such as this as the solution.
And here - talking about bringing local stakeholders together to find a solution - yet ignoring the underlying cause. Someone is burning coal to the west of us, for profit - and we are suffering a cost as a result.
Why do we accept a system which allows that? Shouldn't capitalism be honest?
Rather than demanding these disparate groups come together and figure out how to bear the costs of mitigation - which again, is laudable; wouldn't it be wiser and more sustainable to demand better from those causing the harm?
Why are we not even allowed to ask? Or for that matter, demand? In a system where any legislator who does ask is attacked by lobbyists with unlimited power.
Again - you focus on the tree in front of you and ignore the forest.
In this particular instance - there are solutions. RGGI is a good example. One that was suspended by Virginia's Republican Party. It only addressed part of the harms, yet it was a start. Until they squashed it.
Will it be back? It should.
If you want honest capitalism - that creates a fair playing field between those making the money, and those bearing the costs - we need fundamental changes in our system.
Let's start with honest, fair, just competition - where all are welcome to make a profit, but not without accounting for the harms incurred in the process - not one that expects the ones incurring the harm to spend all of their energies figuring out the best way to clean up the mess caused by others.
Just some thoughts.... and I hope Mr Jones does well.