Democracy for America's specific aims
The o-blog has updated with a clear list of the specific goals of DFA v2, reformulated in a much more direct manner than previously:
I think that the ranking overall is correct, though I don't see #2 as something that is more of a consequence rather than a goal. There's no way to force politicians to run for office, but those who choose to run are filtered by our votes. So if we can give people the facts they need, the resources they require for their own fact-checking, then problem #2 will correct itself.
That brings me to my main point, which is that DFA is not going to the internet-centric vehicle that most pundits predicted, The internet is just another medium, and will be used to great effect. But for a centralized and open resource that people can use to fact-check their elected pols, right now the best we have is Google and the blogsphere, which is woefully inefficient.
What we really need is an open-source version of Lexis-Nexis!
1. First, Democracy for America will be committed to strong, sustained grassroots involvement in the democratic process. Today, half of Americans don’t even bother to vote. People see what the problems are, but they are cynical about the system and prospects for change. Only through acting will people recognize the power they have to change this country.
2. Second, Democracy for America will be committed to promoting an America where candidates and office holders tell the truth about policy choices and stand up for what they believe. The era when politicians equivocate about matters as fundamental as war and peace must end.
3. Third, Democracy for America will be committed to fighting against the influence and agenda of the two pillars of George W. Bush’s Washington: the far right wing and their radical, divisive policies, and the selfish special interests who for too long have dominated politics.
4. Fourth, Democracy for America will be committed to fighting for progressive policies, like health care for all; investment in children; equal rights under law; fiscal responsibility; and a national security policy that makes America stronger by advancing progressive values.
I think that the ranking overall is correct, though I don't see #2 as something that is more of a consequence rather than a goal. There's no way to force politicians to run for office, but those who choose to run are filtered by our votes. So if we can give people the facts they need, the resources they require for their own fact-checking, then problem #2 will correct itself.
That brings me to my main point, which is that DFA is not going to the internet-centric vehicle that most pundits predicted, The internet is just another medium, and will be used to great effect. But for a centralized and open resource that people can use to fact-check their elected pols, right now the best we have is Google and the blogsphere, which is woefully inefficient.
What we really need is an open-source version of Lexis-Nexis!
Comments