Political Reboot

[Moon68]

Well, in Starship Troopers ( the book of course, not the deliciously ridiculous entertaining but myopically churlish attempt of a movie) the only difference between a citizen and a civilian was the right to vote and hold office. The main reason for that difference is the citizen knows what actual sacrifice entails as they have had to fight and work for every minute of their enlistment. The citizen learns that they are responsible for decisions that affect all people and that humanity is far far greater than any one person. Not only comes that responsibility but also, with full knowledge and acceptance, the consequences of every decision made. That is the accountability that is missing in our modern system, too many votes for self or their own special interests.

As far as age limits, we already have minimums. Although there are many highly intelligent, civic minded individuals with an exceptional grasp of politics, they have to wait. By the inverse, there comes a point where most start to fade, to lose the plot. Somewhere between 65 and 80 the mind just isn't as sharp or analytical.

"When the people learn that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -- Benjamin Franklin

[PorkChop96]

That is the accountability that is missing in our modern system, too many votes for self or their own special interests.

That sums it all up right there. Along with the previously mentioned indoctrination by those of questionable knowledge and motive.
 

As far as age limits, we already have minimums. Although there are many highly intelligent, civic minded individuals with an exceptional grasp of politics, they have to wait. By the inverse, there comes a point where most start to fade, to lose the plot. Somewhere between 65 and 80 the mind just isn't as sharp or analytical.

"When the people learn that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -- Benjamin Franklin

Maybe somehow come up with an aptitude test for those that are below the minimum to prove they are qualified to hold that position? 

I think even going up to 65 on the age limit is pushing the boundaries. If you are in this until you are 65, you have reached "retirement age" and have worked this as a "career", something that should be avoided at all costs.

[Moon68]

That sums it all up right there. Along with the previously mentioned indoctrination by those of questionable knowledge and motive.
 


Maybe somehow come up with an aptitude test for those that are below the minimum to prove they are qualified to hold that position? 

I think even going up to 65 on the age limit is pushing the boundaries. If you are in this until you are 65, you have reached "retirement age" and have worked this as a "career", something that should be avoided at all costs.

Going back to Heinlein, if one has gone thru the service, be it military or civil (both were in the novel) the individual already knows if they are qualified. If they know they are inadequate for the job, their own sense of civic responsibility would prevent them from trying to hold a position of power over others.

[UltraBudgie]

Like libertarianism, Heinlein's ideas really only work in high-trust culturally and ethically homogeneous societies. In his books, this is achieved through mandatory experience requirements for citizenship, a 'science' of moral philosophy, and rootin' tootin' just-plain-common-sense.

The alternative in his books being Nehemiah Scudder's interregnum, where the same social conformity is achieved through bad evil unsound means and of course leads to oppression and failure. Go fifth column! Many confuse Heinlein with an authoritarian or fascist, because they don't see the contrast he was trying to make.

To be fair, in retrospect he seems somewhat naïve.

[Moon68]

Or go the other way, and if you've made a security or military oath you should not be allowed to vote, because an essential part of those is receiving indoctrination and this creates a feedback loop imposing the government's worldview and will upon the citizenry and that runs counter to the idea of democratic oversight.

But Heinlein had some good insights about expansive levels of responsibility beyond the personal; I'm just being contrary.

I found this to be an excellent breakdown of the neo-republican theories of Starship Troopers society even though I think the writer could have gone into greater detail of the civil service aspect of Federal Service depicted in the novel.

karlovian

[Moon68]

Like libertarianism, Heinlein's ideas really only work in high-trust culturally and ethically homogeneous societies. In his books, this is achieved through mandatory experience requirements for citizenship, a 'science' of moral philosophy, and rootin' tootin' just-plain-common-sense.

The alternative in his books being Nehemiah Scudder's interregnum, where the same social conformity is achieved through bad evil unsound means and of course leads to oppression and failure. Go fifth column! Many confuse Heinlein with an authoritarian or fascist, because they don't see the contrast he was trying to make.

To be fair, in retrospect he seems somewhat naïve.

Of course, any type of utopianism is going to involve some sort of naivete, including the Republicanism of the United States as envisioned by the founders.

Mandatory for citizenship, but 100% voluntary, with voting as the difference between citizen and civilian.

[sahgwa]

Or go the other way, and if you've made a security or military oath you should not be allowed to vote, because an essential part of those is receiving indoctrination and this creates a feedback loop imposing the government's worldview and will upon the citizenry and that runs counter to the idea of democratic oversight.

But Heinlein had some good insights about expansive levels of responsibility beyond the personal; I'm just being contrary.

I beg to differ, having taken an oath to the Constitution, that is loads and far away different from me taking an oath to an administration.
I often disagree with the President, and stupid politicians. I should be allowed to vote against them.

[Maxmars]

Your contextual obstacles are interwoven.

That presents new opportunities.

Use them.


End the Fed...

Not possible, they are one tentacle of the global ruling class.
Aside from their wrath - doled out among the people - 
You have the entrenched fat from our own society... deeply endebted.

The Press does not really exists as an institution anymore.

The media/commerce combine is fully utilized to flash and beep when we should
be paying attention to their productions.

Social media was virtually (heh heh) subsumed by 'monetization' and all users became profit fodder.

A new hidden currency exists, unmeasured, un "proclaimed"... user data... moved in terabytes at a time.

It will surface, this giant iceberg plopped into the social mix...
I promise it will be uglier than anyone suspects.


But these folks behind the 19th century wet-dream control ideal are all dying and the tech overtook them... even though they've wasted billions (trillions) on achieving the "man as cattle/robot" model.  They really suck at this.  

They refuse the reality of the world... people are not stupid, your ideals are unsustainable, you are an idiot following the precepts of disconnected values granted to ignorant people... not as truth, but as fact.

To them I might say,

"Today is not yesterday... it was unseen by yesterday... just as you cant see tomorrow...
Your ideals of "humankind" as a management problem, were for a dreamer of yesterday...
You, are destined to be "yesterday."

Humans are not to be "controlled" and will not long stand being "exploited."
Get over it.