The Case for Direct Democracy

We, as a party, do not support direct democracy because of some romantic notion, which we prioritize to the point that we ignore empirical contingencies and the complexities they create for anyone who attempts to configure changes that are more than minute tweaks to the current complex of sociopolitical institutions, constituting American governance.

Rather, our insistence upon the establishment of direct democratic institutions to American polity arises from considerations that are practical, immediate, and, in fact, necessary if we are to salvage whatever semblance America has had of a Nation of the People and by the People, whose government acts on behalf of the People. As opposed to, a People suffering under the tyranny of a group of self anointed Ubermenchen with multinational interests, who promote their own will toward profit maximization above any interests they might possess in common with the ordinary citizenry of this country.

Whether it is Chuck Schumer refusing to allow tax reforms that will subject the managers of Hedge Funds – who are personified manifestations of the corporate cowboy culture, who apparently operate in terrains outside of the reach of the Federal Income Tax – to the same income taxes as everyone else – as opposed to them paying the lesser 15% that is excised from the capital gains tax; or whether it be virtually every Republican who continues to support the sinking ship in Iraq, all of the while exclaiming their support of the Military, which is rapidly disintegrating from the demands placed upon it in the Middle East – it is clear that the interests of the Nation of the People are not represented in Congress. In fact, it is difficult to know who precisely enjoys representation by Congress, other than Hedge Fund Operators, Defense Contractors, and firms in related industries, such as mercenary outfits – i.e., Blackwater – who are, perhaps, the only beneficiaries of this ghastly misadventure in Iraq.

With direct democratic institutions installed in government – where the people can impact public policy through initiative, referendum, and recall: a process of policy formation that negates in its mechanisms steps involving an intermediary body, which consists of our ‘representatives,’ in Congress, there could be a rather hastened end to the slow motion train-wreck in Iraq. In short, public opinion could be leveraged for purposes of directly enacting legislation that would serve as a device compelling the President to put aside concerns regarding his legacy in order to concentrate upon matters pertaining to the present.

Further, if we had the power to recall the President, the popular support, even, for such a resolution to pass would not be entirely necessary, because Bush would continue to be restrained by the shifts in Public Opinion, due to the threat of the initiation of such a process. He would not be so brash, where he follows along in his messianic delusions, leading this country unimpeded to increasingly injurious disasters, since he would be vulnerable to the type of legacy we might compare with that of the former Governor of California, Gray Davis.

If all of this appears to be too simplistic – too intellectually effortless – I would counter that the reason that this reform agenda to American politics – namely, the installment of direct democratic institutions – fails to find itself incorporated into the advocacies of legislators and corporate media outfits is attributable to the fact that it poses a threat to vested interests. It is simply too viable and too accessible a means for the popular reform of politics and power relations in American society. Those who suppress these ideas are simply acting in accord with their own particular interests.

With the ability for the Population to recall public officials, Congressional Representatives would not be in a position to tow the Party Line when casting their votes. The President would not be able to persist in foreign policies that have already proven to be disastrous. In short, those in power would be constrained to policy formation parameters that reflect the interests of the American Population.

Russell Cole