So, I have a (vague) question about the philosophy of this site.
In, say, senate elections we are only allowed to vote in one state, the state of our residence.
But we can contribute money to any state - which seems a strange thing but, hey, freedom of speech I guess?
Of course, it also seems strange to me that money seems to matter so much because, after all, can't the voters make up their minds for themselves from unbiased sources?
Like, maybe I get it that in pre-internet days it took money to spread the word but nowadays plenty of websites present rather objective views for free.
So, where do you stand on money in politics? Is it closer to "a good thing" or to a "well, them's the rules so we must play that way"? And what is your view on why it matters so much? It seems to put the question to democracy that I can just blast people with biased ads and affect their votes ...
I ask these things because it seems one needs a foundation for "what is good" in order to discriminate between "bugs" and "features" of anything going on in our democracy.
7 months and 7 weeks seem straightforward enough, though the "improved" in "improved voting rules" seems unclear.
Electoral College reform: by this do you mean that what you really want is to eliminate equal representation of the states in the senate? Or just a nationwide popular vote for the presidency?
Ideally I am thinking of a "manifesto" that outlines what democratic ideals should be, in a practical world.
So, I have a (vague) question about the philosophy of this site.
In, say, senate elections we are only allowed to vote in one state, the state of our residence.
But we can contribute money to any state - which seems a strange thing but, hey, freedom of speech I guess?
Of course, it also seems strange to me that money seems to matter so much because, after all, can't the voters make up their minds for themselves from unbiased sources?
Like, maybe I get it that in pre-internet days it took money to spread the word but nowadays plenty of websites present rather objective views for free.
So, where do you stand on money in politics? Is it closer to "a good thing" or to a "well, them's the rules so we must play that way"? And what is your view on why it matters so much? It seems to put the question to democracy that I can just blast people with biased ads and affect their votes ...
I ask these things because it seems one needs a foundation for "what is good" in order to discriminate between "bugs" and "features" of anything going on in our democracy.
7 years: idealistic reforms, work towards the best outcomes. Example: Electoral College reform.
7 months: practical reforms, take what can be done. Example: improved voting rules.
7 weeks: rules are in place, can't change them. Operate within the realm of what is possible.
7 months and 7 weeks seem straightforward enough, though the "improved" in "improved voting rules" seems unclear.
Electoral College reform: by this do you mean that what you really want is to eliminate equal representation of the states in the senate? Or just a nationwide popular vote for the presidency?
Ideally I am thinking of a "manifesto" that outlines what democratic ideals should be, in a practical world.