I think that the markers of success for the Klein/Thompson book are:
1. Does is cause an argument on the Left/is it a Molotov cocktail?
2. Does it propel Left/Dem-dominated states to create the best societies?—not utopias, mind you—but actual places people want to live, don’t want to leave, and feel that they are living (or struggling) well.
It seems like Goal 1 might be accomplished this year and maybe already.
While I agree with the diagnosis that active, invested minority groups capture key oversight/rule-making processes, I am DEEPLY dissatisfied with the 🤷🏼♂️ response that the [Mayor/President/Executive] is elected and therefore should have more power and more courage.
This approach clearly trends toward that Unitary Executive Theory, which I find extremely problematic for democracy. The Founders likely didn’t anticipate the expansive real-world powers of todays‘ Administrative State (in numerous ways), so I believe this is substantial gap in US democracy as-is. Executives are often elected by a mere plurality - often based on simple Party affiliation and/or name recognition. They can be persuaded or captured by campaign donors (corporations, billionaires) or other vested interests, too. And that idea of ‘courage,’ while important in public leadership, can cut both ways. Finally, I think myopic focus on technocratic solutions to improve the Administrative State misses the public’s frustration with a government that seems more responsive to an incestuous managerial elite than residents.
So, I’d advocate that making institutions more inclusive and responsive to stakeholders - finding more and better ways for multiple stakeholders to actively shape/balance public priorities/delivery/rule-making - MUST go hand-in-hand with a more powerful and efficacious government.
We'd be much better off with a proportional representation system for the legislature, and a greater role for that legislature. (If not an outright parliamentary system, at least one where the legislature was not completely supine, the way the Republican majority is in the face of the Executive doing stuff that the laws on the books plainly say he can't.)
Alas, what happens now is that Minoritarianism becomes absolutely and uniformly "bad" and must be eliminated in all cases. (Actually "deproceduralization" is indeed a better word in this regard, because it implies a process rather than some human "group"; i.e. it lacks human targets.) The Right is already ridiculing cities such as the one I live in.
Yes, it was a minority, the Portland City Council, that deemed back in the 70s that instead of another freeway for the region, we'd get light rail fifteen years later. It's still a pain to traverse the route the freeway would have covered. But in the meantime Portland established light rail as viable and effective transit for western cities.
Oregon's Urban Growth Boundary (zoning!!) was perhaps not as minoritarian, but it had unintended (perhaps not unanticipated consequences) regarding housing costs. So should we get rid of it? Lots of us wouldn't be here if Portland sprawled like Los Angeles.
The challenge is to punch back from the left in ways that acknowledge the effective tensions between minoritarian groups and the public at large. DOGE is setting a good example of the contrary. Maybe people are even appreciating the utility of public sector unions when it comes to dire circumstances. But the inherent problem of mitigating the inherent complexity and rigidity of large social systems (not to mention all the other systems) remains the predominant challenge of our century.
Highly recommend “Why Nothing Works” by Marc Dunkelman as it provides an enlightening and detailed account of the tension between the building up centralized state capacity vs regulating / encumbering the state & pushing power down and out (to unions, to citizens, etc.) across the history of American progressivism. It makes it clear that we have tied ourselves into a Gordian knot. I am hoping the abundance agenda starts to point at a way out.
I do think our slow processes gave some ammunition to DOGE.
And adding thousands of homes to expensive areas with a housing shortage would help everyone in every way.
I think that the markers of success for the Klein/Thompson book are:
1. Does is cause an argument on the Left/is it a Molotov cocktail?
2. Does it propel Left/Dem-dominated states to create the best societies?—not utopias, mind you—but actual places people want to live, don’t want to leave, and feel that they are living (or struggling) well.
It seems like Goal 1 might be accomplished this year and maybe already.
" In other words, decisions that should be made in the broad public interest are captured by a minority."
Yes, but is is a minority that asserts it represents the majority. [If there were only a _procedure_ to prevent that! :)]
While I agree with the diagnosis that active, invested minority groups capture key oversight/rule-making processes, I am DEEPLY dissatisfied with the 🤷🏼♂️ response that the [Mayor/President/Executive] is elected and therefore should have more power and more courage.
This approach clearly trends toward that Unitary Executive Theory, which I find extremely problematic for democracy. The Founders likely didn’t anticipate the expansive real-world powers of todays‘ Administrative State (in numerous ways), so I believe this is substantial gap in US democracy as-is. Executives are often elected by a mere plurality - often based on simple Party affiliation and/or name recognition. They can be persuaded or captured by campaign donors (corporations, billionaires) or other vested interests, too. And that idea of ‘courage,’ while important in public leadership, can cut both ways. Finally, I think myopic focus on technocratic solutions to improve the Administrative State misses the public’s frustration with a government that seems more responsive to an incestuous managerial elite than residents.
So, I’d advocate that making institutions more inclusive and responsive to stakeholders - finding more and better ways for multiple stakeholders to actively shape/balance public priorities/delivery/rule-making - MUST go hand-in-hand with a more powerful and efficacious government.
We'd be much better off with a proportional representation system for the legislature, and a greater role for that legislature. (If not an outright parliamentary system, at least one where the legislature was not completely supine, the way the Republican majority is in the face of the Executive doing stuff that the laws on the books plainly say he can't.)
The executive must be in charge of the executive branch
Otherwise, there is no way for voters to be able to hold the administrative state accountable
Which is unacceptable. And which results in things like Trump being elected and DOGE
As I recall, now was also "not the time" in 2023 and 2024.
Alas, what happens now is that Minoritarianism becomes absolutely and uniformly "bad" and must be eliminated in all cases. (Actually "deproceduralization" is indeed a better word in this regard, because it implies a process rather than some human "group"; i.e. it lacks human targets.) The Right is already ridiculing cities such as the one I live in.
Yes, it was a minority, the Portland City Council, that deemed back in the 70s that instead of another freeway for the region, we'd get light rail fifteen years later. It's still a pain to traverse the route the freeway would have covered. But in the meantime Portland established light rail as viable and effective transit for western cities.
Oregon's Urban Growth Boundary (zoning!!) was perhaps not as minoritarian, but it had unintended (perhaps not unanticipated consequences) regarding housing costs. So should we get rid of it? Lots of us wouldn't be here if Portland sprawled like Los Angeles.
The challenge is to punch back from the left in ways that acknowledge the effective tensions between minoritarian groups and the public at large. DOGE is setting a good example of the contrary. Maybe people are even appreciating the utility of public sector unions when it comes to dire circumstances. But the inherent problem of mitigating the inherent complexity and rigidity of large social systems (not to mention all the other systems) remains the predominant challenge of our century.
“Lots of us wouldn’t be here”… the right to housing meets the right to be in a nice place.
Highly recommend “Why Nothing Works” by Marc Dunkelman as it provides an enlightening and detailed account of the tension between the building up centralized state capacity vs regulating / encumbering the state & pushing power down and out (to unions, to citizens, etc.) across the history of American progressivism. It makes it clear that we have tied ourselves into a Gordian knot. I am hoping the abundance agenda starts to point at a way out.
A fucking men