Occupy Wall Street Protestors: This Is The Cohesive Solution You're All Looking For

So we're hearing how Occupy Wall Street has no coherent message or goal and I am here to propose one. I tried to think of a solution that would unify everyone, the 99% and the other 1%. I want it to be something that everyone can rally around. I wanted it to be democratic and far reaching. I wanted it to be simple and direct yet have profound improvements to our society as a whole. And I wanted it to be something that could grow. I dont have all the answers but I do have a simple, unifying proposal. There are smarter people out there who can work through the finer points. So without any further ado, the cohesive solution to many of our problems:

A Congressional Draft.

Which would be like a military draft but instead of going to war, you go to political office. Or like jury duty but for Congress.

All of us, every single adult in the country, from the very smart to the very dumb, will have an equal chance of becoming a leader of their community and country. I would limit the appoints to mostly the Congress/Parliamentary offices where debates are held and laws are proposed. Not something like President or Supreme Court Justices because that’s not very effective when the main goal is to run a stable society. But it must include EVERYONE. The only exclusion I can think of is people in jail or the people who are violent and mentally deranged in mental institutions.

So the benefits of this idea to a blossoming movement like Occupy Wall Street are as follows:

1 – Inclusivity – This idea involves everyone, even those that don’t want to be in political office. Too bad. It’s your public SERVICE. Right now holding office is a privilege, they get money, power, celebrity and whatever else people get out of it. Its not the burden that made George Washington quit after 8 years. So political offices must include everyone or we’ll just run into another Occupy Wall Street, another revolution and another empire collapse – all for the same reason: the few cannot govern the many. It cant work. Its never worked.

2 – Simplicity – You don’t get much simpler than one sentence you can write on a sign. This saves you all from wasting precious time and energy on lengthy proposals that need to be discussed, voted and ratified. We don’t have time for that. Its only a matter of time before some dufus says the wrong thing on camera and it becomes the “face” of the movement in the media who’s goal is to destroy this movement. So keep it simple before you lose the global spotlight you have.

3 – Growth – This is an idea you can discuss and deliberate. I’m not saying it’s written on tablets at Mt. Sinai. Its an idea that can have a life of its own yet still retain its main purpose. It’d be hard for the media to find a reason to dislike this idea without sounding elitist and out of touch with the people. How can anyone not want the chance to use government to fix the problems they see in their lives? This is an idea that spans all countries and governments as well. It doesn’t stop at Wall Street.


So those are the immediate benefits to your movement. But what about for society as a whole after a Congressional Draft is implemented. Heres a few implications. Post with yours.

1- Direct Representation –

Regular people, like you and I, would actually have the chance to govern our communities. No more of the rich governing the poor. That’s never worked. One group governing another is what’s crumbled every single empire in the history of civilization. The only thing that hasn’t been tried is direct democracy. Everyone having an equal chance to be drafted into Congress. The 1% of the wealthy would still have a chance to govern. There’s no reason to exclude their opinion in a group of opinions.

A truly representative government represents all classes. We could wrestle our government back from corporations and instill a government truly of, by and for the people. Not just of, by and for the rich people.

2- No More Hiding –

Right now our politicians are protected by their little rich person club. They don’t have to face the regular people because they never have to see the regular people. They just hang around each other so they only have to face each other. This is why we have ZERO accountability with our politicians. They can do whatever they want. If we had a Congressional Draft then government officials, people like you and me, would have to come back to our homes and face the music. So we would all be accountable.

3 – The Duty of Education –

We are not a politically educated country. Many people couldn’t care less. And I don’t blame them. Why should we learn about politics if we’ll never be a politician? Honestly, most kids have a better chance of being a professional athlete than a wealthy politician. That’s why more kids WANT to be a professional athlete. Perhaps if we had the chance to be a politician we would all educate ourselves and each other about the workings of politics. It would be a duty. It would be taught in schools and the teacher could actually say with a straight face, “You may use this civics lesson one day.”

Those are a small list of the outcomes of a Congressional Draft. Who knows what the people would actually do if they had the power, or at least an equal chance to be in power.

Some people may say that people are too dumb, too lazy or too incompetent to lead the country. Some of you are thinking that right now. But if you think this you should turn off the reality TV and start talking to people because they’re intelligent and nothing like the garbage of humanity that haunts TV. Seriously, we can get randomly appointed to jury duty where we can legally execute a person, legally execute a person, but we’re too dumb to run the country? Give me a break.

To those that say this is too radical and crazy, that it could never work. Well, is the current system working? No, its falling apart before our very eyes. A Congressional Draft is direct democracy, the purest form of democracy. We have to catch our society before it falls. We have to have simple, far reaching proposals in place, being discussed, WHILE we watch this system eat itself alive. If we wait until financial collapse and martial law it will be way too late.

Technology has brought us here. It’s taken our jobs, its made us more intelligent, worldly and tolerant. The internet has connected people who once felt helplessly lonely. The world is a smaller place because of technology. The idea that even some farmer in Iowa could educate himself about politics and worldly affairs would have been laughable 100 years ago, 50 years ago and even 10 years ago. The world is different now. Media is all pervasive but no one realizes that we can use that canvas to paint a different picture. It can be used for good and it can do very great things. So the physical possibility of direct democracy and something like a Congressional Draft would have been impossible. But now, it should be inevitable.

Like i said, quibble about the details amongst yourselves. An idea like this is one of the few chances you will have to coalesce this movement and transcend the narrow minded Wall Street angle and turn this thing into a full on people's democratic revolution! Get out there and spread the word about a Congressional Draft

edit to add: Not crazy about the name "Congressional Draft". Feel free to use your own words for it.

In theory, it makes sense. In reality I fear it would be corrupted...quickly.

The devil is in the details.

Originally posted by doctornamtab
All of us, every single adult in the country, from the very smart to the very dumb, will have an equal chance of becoming a leader of their community and country.

Hmmm.. sounds much like the system employed by these peasants...

I think its's a great idea, in fact it's a real thing and there's a name for it, demarchy. Here's a Wikipedia link to it:
Demarchy
As far as the issue of corruption goes this is what the article says:

An attractive feature of demarchy is that if political leaders were replaced on a regular basis with randomly selected citizens, it would reduce institutionalised corruption, party apathy and complacency as well as a history of party led entitlement, lack of choice and variety in political ideas in platforms. It could be argued that replacing politicians in this way would solve such problems. As people would be randomly selected to act as representatives it would be less likely that the person involved would be part of a "party political machine". The theory says that a randomly selected person as a representative would not have to compromise their own beliefs in order to make political alliances and gain support, nor fear political reprisals in implementing tough or controversial legislation. However, as theory goes, there is no inherent guarantee, nor anything a priori in demarchy which guarantees this. There is no proven link that long term political representation equals a larger amount of monetary loss through political corruption nor could it be proven that random citizens in office would end or limit corruption nor that corruption would increase.

I find myself in agreement with the above quote.
Great idea and thanks for posting OP.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
In theory, it makes sense. In reality I fear it would be corrupted...quickly.

The devil is in the details.

How would it be corrupted quickly?

I think the system we have now, where the few rule the many, is easily corruptible because you only have to corrupt a few people.

It would take the corruption of everyone which wouldnt even be called corruption at that point, itd just be how people are.

reply to post by doctornamtab


I just think some group would game the system somehow and while on the surface it would look random, in actuality there would sit be a select few who gain from being in power, if even for a short time.

What would each “Tour of duty” be? If it was four years, four people with the same agenda or goals could cause a lot of damage. Kind of like now.

It’s the picking of the representatives that I am wondering about. How to do it fairly with no chance of gaming it.

As with Jury duty though, can you opt out due to illness, business or family? Guys got out of the draft that way as well.

And if corruption were the norm, I don’t think that much would be accomplished. Nothing but constant bickering and back-stabbing. Kind of like now.

But I think most people are fairly honest.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by doctornamtab

 

I just think some group would game the system somehow and while on the surface it would look random, in actuality there would sit be a select few who gain from being in power, if even for a short time.

What would each “Tour of duty” be? If it was four years, four people with the same agenda or goals could cause a lot of damage. Kind of like now.

It’s the picking of the representatives that I am wondering about. How to do it fairly with no chance of gaming it.

As with Jury duty though, can you opt out due to illness, business or family? Guys got out of the draft that way as well.

And if corruption were the norm, I don’t think that much would be accomplished. Nothing but constant bickering and back-stabbing. Kind of like now.

But I think most people are fairly honest.

Right, I feel like most people are honest, smart and good too. They're just purposely mislead by a crappy education system and TV brainwashing.

But a way that this system will combat corruption is that people like you and me who get drafted into government will have to go back to our communities and face the people we just governed. So much corruption comes from the super rich protecting each other for mutual benefit. They dont have to face the people they govern, they only have to face their super rich friends. This class based lack of accountability is why corruption continues.

Checks and balances were invented to make sure that a small group of people cannot have the same agenda and destroy the democractic ideal. Right now, checks and balances dont work because everyone is in cahoots together. Theres nothing to check and balance because its all ONE POINT OF VIEW. This ruins the very idea of people discussing problems in a parliamentary forum which is essential to democracy and regulated by checks and balances

As for the draft itself just use media. No one claims the lottery is gamed because its on TV for 5 minutes a day. So do the same thing. Put the draft on TV where everyone can see it. Second, print the incomes and occupations of people who are elected to office. This would ensure that no one class or group of businessmen have too much power.

Also, no one would be free to opt out. There is no opt out because the people who want power are the ones who shouldnt have power. Like all addicts, people that want power are easily corruptible. Power is a burden. It is a burden to balance the needs of the nation with the needs of your community and the needs of foreign countries and so on. Power is a priviledge right now and thats another reason for corruption. They get REWARDED for being in power, when in fact, people should be burdened with power. So one is excluded and no one can get out.

reply to post by doctornamtab


Ok, on to the next detail, What would be the term limits? The same as now? (I would pick that), or would theer be a swap in Reps every so many years enmasse? (Which would probably cause mass confusion as reps entered office while the old ones left. Not to mention their staffs)

I like your idea for Congress, but how would it work for the POTUS and SCOTUS? Would POTUS be electoral vote or popular? And how would the SCOTUS be put in place?

Details, details... They drive me nuts!

If this movement started 4 years ago - - - I might be interested.

Because in reality - - the fight is against the destruction caused by that administration.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by doctornamtab

 

Ok, on to the next detail, What would be the term limits? The same as now? (I would pick that), or would theer be a swap in Reps every so many years enmasse? (Which would probably cause mass confusion as reps entered office while the old ones left. Not to mention their staffs)

I like your idea for Congress, but how would it work for the POTUS and SCOTUS? Would POTUS be electoral vote or popular? And how would the SCOTUS be put in place?

Details, details...

They drive me nuts!

Yeah four years would be good. And we could probably put a stipulation in there that once you serve you can't serve again. This would keep politicians from becoming entrenched in the system.

I'm thinking this would be mostly for the Congress/Parliament places where ideas are discussed and the people are (supposedly) represented. POTUS would stay the same, I dont want to argue electoral college vs popular vote but popular vote seems to be what the founders of democracy had in mind. SCOTUS would stay the same and be appointed for life by the president. I dont see too much trouble with the way SCOTUS is chosen. Its partisan but then again so is everything else in American politics. Checks and balances should take care of the rest.

reply to post by doctornamtab


Let me see if I'm following. Every two years would be a draft. One for Senator, four year term. And one for Representative, also a four year term.

Sen - 2012, 2016 and Rep 2014 and 2018?

Am I tracking?

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by doctornamtab

 

Let me see if I'm following. Every two years would be a draft. One for Senator, four year term. And one for Representative, also a four year term.

Sen - 2012, 2016 and Rep 2014 and 2018?

Am I tracking?

Right, the idea is to get people discussing politics while in Congress (imagine that). Instead of passing a law and then debating it in the media we, the people, the poor people, could shuffle ourselves in and out and have our voices heard.

I like staggering the drafts because that will get fresh ideas and new opinions in government. Something thats damn near impossible nowadays.

reply to post by doctornamtab


Ok, another detail. Sorry I can't come up with them all at once. Thank God. I'd never get anything done.

How would we determine if a person is deemed mentally incompetent to be in office or has a felony? Would felons be subject to the draft even?

What would we do if the individual was proven to be incompetent while in office?

Would impeachment and special drafts be allowed in these cases?

reply to post by doctornamtab


I don't know how to bump a thread other than the S&F which I have already gave. But this is a interesting idea and am curious to how others think as well.

Wish it could be posted on the front page.

Ya got me thinking. Thanks for the headache.

S&F

I have suggest something similar before. Even using the jury duty analogy. However, I would take it a step further and have the "drafted" politicians sequestered throughout their term, so as to avoid any outside influences.

Originally posted by TDawgRex
reply to post by doctornamtab

 

Ok, another detail. Sorry I can't come up with them all at once. Thank God.

I'd never get anything done.

How would we determine if a person is deemed mentally incompetent to be in office or has a felony? Would felons be subject to the draft even?

What would we do if the individual was proven to be incompetent while in office?

Would impeachment and special drafts be allowed in these cases?

Hey no worries. These are questions I'll have to answer in the long run and I'm not very good with finding the holes in my own ideas. So thanks for the details and keep em coming.

I'd say we'd determine mental incompetence by the same way we would in a criminal case. If someone can stand trial or give testimony then they're competent enough to be in Congress. I wouldnt want children or people with the mental age of children in Congress. If someone was in office, got hit in the head or something, and became mentally incompetent then I dont know what to do. Just leave it vacant? Draft a new person into it?

I'd think we could let felons in. I mean the government is fully stocked with felons right now, so we'd actually be REDUCING the number of criminals in government. I wouldnt want to exclude ex-convicts who have paid for their crimes. They have opinions and a voice that should be heard, regardless of their legal mistakes in the past.

If someone was just plain bad at being a politician then I think we just ride them out. Let them improve themselves. Besides, a major component of this idea is that people would BECOME competent at politics because they'd actually have the chance to get into office. So let the bad ones finish their term and be done with it. There are people who are bad at being in office right now and theres nothing we can do about it.

Id like to keep impeachment to just the President, VP, Sec of State, Sec of Foreign Affiars. To impeach a randomly appointed person could lead to corruption and clog the system with timewasting accusations. If someone in office did something criminal then of course theyd be tried and if found guilty, they'd be impeached.

reply to post by doctornamtab


Here we go again with another.

How would the various committees be formed. By the people or by the members of congress? Maybe some could even be eliminated and the vote would go to the people to decide what action to take?

Still thinking, but it's time repair the truck. My parts have arrived! YeeHaa!

Originally posted by Aggie Man
S&F

I have suggest something similar before. Even using the jury duty analogy. However, I would take it a step further and have the "drafted" politicians sequestered throughout their term, so as to avoid any outside influences.

Thats an interesting idea. But I think itd be better that our politicians have the most information they can get. If they're not talking to the public or hearing what other country's are saying then they can't govern very effectively.
The reason our government is in shambles is because, in effect, our leaders ARE sequestered. They don't talk to the public or listen to other countries. They're sequestered and trapped by their money and class.

Originally posted by doctornamtab

Originally posted by Aggie Man
S&F

I have suggest something similar before. Even using the jury duty analogy. However, I would take it a step further and have the "drafted" politicians sequestered throughout their term, so as to avoid any outside influences.

Thats an interesting idea. But I think itd be better that our politicians have the most information they can get. If they're not talking to the public or hearing what other country's are saying then they can't govern very effectively.
The reason our government is in shambles is because, in effect, our leaders ARE sequestered. They don't talk to the public or listen to other countries. They're sequestered and trapped by their money and class.

Certainly, it would have to be some modified form of sequester. Really, I think they should be open to citizens as individuals (but only citizens from their own constituency); however, I believe they should be sequestered from any form of corporate contact and be forbidden from grandstanding in front of the media. Maybe we could put camera's in their offices in an effort to keep them honest. I really don't know what to do, or if it is even possible, to completely remove corruption and greed from the system, but I believe that the more safety nets we put in place, then the more difficult it will be.

reply to post by Aggie Man


Maybe the modified form of sequester would be that they never leave their constiuancy unless there is a matter of National importance? That way the people would have actual access to them all the time...wow, what a curse, eh?

That way they would be talking to the local people they represent at any given moment. No more form letters or ignored emails/letters.

In matters of National infrastucture and defense, I say give them two weeks in DC to hammer it out. They enter the building and are not allowed out until a consensus has been reached.

Is that a bit of niave thinking or what?