If you have some time, listen to this story from 99% Invisible.  Because my summary won’t do justice to it.

In Seattle they were going to build a new mall.  But one of the homeowners refused to sell.  Edith Macefield was in her 80s and she turned down first $750,000 and then $1,000,000 for her home, which was valued at about $120,000.

The news, quite naturally, loved this story and made Mrs. Macefield into an icon about blight of urbanization etc.  They projected their own agenda on to the story.  Mrs. Macefield mostly refused to speak to them, so they were free to make any story they wanted about it.

If this was a movie, the constructions guys would be the bad guys, but as it turns out, they liked Mrs. Macefield and the supervisor made friends with her.  They kept an eye on her, while they build the mall around her tiny little home.

In the end though, it turns out that Mrs. Macefield  wasn’t angry at the builders or at the way the world was changing. She was friendly with the construction workers.  She was just old and it was hard to change and hard to move around and she already knew where everything in her home was.  She had no family to leave it to, therefore the money was just irrelevant to her.  So, she didn’t move.

Its important to remember this.  Mrs. Macefield’s real story is different than the one projected on her by the news media, who told her story like it was David vs Goliath but with high minded ideals about over urbanization. And so the public of Seattle saw Mrs. Macefield entirely as something she wasn’t.

We view the stories of the world through the only lens we are provided.

And that lens is the news media we consume.  We are aware that we are seeing a skewed version of politics depending on which news channel we watch.  Aware of the distortion caused by which country’s news we are watching.  But less distinct is the everyday things we see as straight reporting.

No matter how its presented, the person writing/reporting a story is projecting their version of the story. That version may not be the same version someone else involved in the story would give.  Sometimes the fault lies in lack of information that gets filled in by the storyteller.  Sometimes the fault lies in innate views of the storyteller, which inform everything they see.

In any case, the actual events aren’t quite as they are being told.

There is a tendency to say to people who are the victims of common crimes – “It’s your own fault, if you had just done X or Y, it wouldn’t have happened.” Or alternatively, “If you had just not done V or W, it wouldn’t have happened.”

The most basic flaw in this logic is that you have undermined a basic contract of civilized society.  We all agree to abide by the law so that we can all be safe.  So, for example, in order for me and you not be killed, we agree not kill other people.  And we agree that there will an applicable punishment and social stigma for breaking this law.

All of our basic laws are ultimately a way for all people to feel safe.  If we give in to the idea that certain crimes are so common that one of the people to blame for the crime is the victim for not protecting themselves properly, we have now changed the basic tenet of civilization.  We have now tacitly accepted that this crime is an exception to the social contract.

The contract says we all have a right to the safety of ourself and our property.  That is the fundamental reason for civilization.

When enough people blame the victims, the perpetrator of the crime is perceived as  less guilty because it was so “easy” and the victim was thereby assigned some of the criminal’s guilt.  It also gives permission to more people to do something illegal or immoral because it was just easy and they were asking for it by not taking better precaution.

It is too idealistic to assume that certain crimes don’t happen.  But there is a difference between blaming the victim and teaching yourself or another person to be prepared against a possible crime.

Victim Blaming is not just hurtful to the victim, it is detrimental to our society in general.

You know why?

Because with a dictator – THERE’S THE PROBLEM.  Its this one idiot who we can point to.  They are the problem.

When it’s a democracy – well, that’s not so easy is it?  There’s all the idiots in elected positions.  Idiots who got voted in by the population or at least some portion of it.

And then you have to face how complicated it all is.  Everyone is the problem. The system is a complicated pile of problems.

Can’t get rid of democracy/republic.  That’s the only thing we can all agree on.  It doesn’t work really super well, but it’s generally regarded as being a good thing.

Can’t get elected officials to change laws that will be a disadvantage to said elected officials.  That a nonstarter for obvious reasons.

Can’t convince other members of the population that their particular choice of elected person is an idiot.

All of it grinds to a halt and nothing happens on a regular basis while either a brawl or a standoff is going on. Which does at least make good theater.

But in the meantime stupid amounts of money being wasted on pointless bridges to nowhere or entire populations being poisoned or war happens.

So I fantasize about a nice simple dictatorship.  Where the problem is nicely contained in that one person.  So easily explained.  So thoroughly eliminated when that person is eliminated.  AND once that ugly dictator problem is eliminated, you get to start with a clean slate re-do of the basics in the way a proper democracy / republic should work.

It all looks good on paper.  If you ignore all the horrors that are associated with most dictatorships.

Sigh. I suppose ignoring that would be bad.

The Problems:

Primaries are centered around the 2 party system. Excluding the value of smaller third parties because the media focuses on the existing system of finding someone in each of the two parties to run.  This gives a tremendous advantage to those inside that party system.

Primaries are NOT representative of the voting public. They range widely in how they are handled resulting a deformed view of what actual consensus looks like.

Some states have caucuses – ie people standing in a room and having their vote publicly counted. People don’t like having to openly vote. Its awkward. There is a VERY noticeable lack of turnout for caucuses.

Then there are closed primaries, where only people who are registered members of the party can vote for the potential candidates. This seems reasonable, after all the party is the one sponsoring the candidate, but the reality is that anyone registered can vote for this person AFTER that date, so basically we are having some people choose what other people can vote on.

And then those counted votes are not counted evenly. Some state’s parties have a system where they allocate the votes proportionally to the delegates – ie 20% of the votes gets 20% of the delegates and other states allocate 100% of the delegates to whomever got the most votes.

Some states send their delegates with instructions to vote the election results, but those delegates are NOT REQUIRED to vote as elections indicate.  Yup.  They can just vote anyway they want to.  And on occasion they have.

Many states do a system where SOME delegates just vote however the fuck they want. No pretense that they should follow the voters, they are specifically directed to vote their conscious or their wallet or for their favorite m&ms.  Yeah. That’s right, just a few dozen people are deciding who gets to run for this office in those cases. This obvious creates a serious misrepresentation of what the actual population of the country wants.

Then there are states that completely avoid having a public primary vote as Colorado did this year to avoid giving any delegates to Trump. That happened. In a system that leads to who will be our President. A few powerful people chose how the delegates would vote by not letting the public vote at all.

Finally – none of these things is consistent from year to year.  Every year, the parties just decide to change it around.  They change anything from the dates to the method of voting.

And then there’s the problem of how few people vote at all, much less in a primary. As a result of undervoting we have a massively unrepresentative election. This needs to change.

The Solution:

FIRST: We change to the Alternative Vote.

Stop the the first past the post system of voting. That’s the one we all know – where the person with the majority of the votes wins. But you can have the majority of the votes and not represent the majority of voters. This is ESPECIALLY true in primaries where there are so many people in the field. So a candidate may win all the delegates by getting 32% of the votes. That doesn’t seem right, does it?
So let’s change to Alternative Vote. Watch the video to understand.  Essentially the Alternative Vote allows people to vote for people in order of preference.  And if your first choice is eliminated, your vote goes to your second choice and so on.  Believe me, it’s a WAY better plan.

SECOND: ALL Primaries happen on the same date.

We aren’t spreading this nightmare out over half a year. One day, with all potential candidates in same stew pot. No backsies. We had a spread of dates because historically candidates had to get around and explain themselves. Be seen in person. Well, let’s face it, that’s not necessary anymore. No one is going to a rally to change their mind. They are going to show support. We make our decisions based on information we gather on TV and the Internet.

THIRD: EVERYONE Votes.

You can go and mark Abstain, but YOU HAVE TO SHOW UP. Just like filing your taxes. It’s something everyone has to do. Some people feel this is a lack of freedom. But I think you can still act on your choice not to vote by abstaining, but you don’t get to just opt out because you too were lazy that day.

FOURTH: Candidates are required to publish and discuss all of their proposed policies on a pre-set list of issues.

In depth. You want to build a wall around the US, you need to submit a plan that shows how much it will cost, how it will be funded, details on how it will be accomplished, and analysis on expected outcomes WITH EVIDENCE.  Your proposal must include at least 2 legitimate objections to your plan and your counter position to those objections.  “We’ll see” doesn’t count as a counter argument. (interesting side note: this is how big business is run and if someone walked up to Trump the CEO with an outlandish idea, that person would need to put together just such a report to even get 30 seconds of Trump’s consideration. But apparently that’s not how he’s going to handle the Presidency)

FIFTH: Everyone votes on Everything.

With Alternative Vote that means you will vote for candidates in each party separately giving first, second, third etc to each one within that party. Or Abstain wholly or by individual. And that also means that EVERY Party has a chance to be considered in primaries.

There are downsides to this. For example, the Republicans may be favoring Cruz or Trump heavily but since the rest of the country is also voting on it –  Kasich, the moderate, may walk away with win.

But you can also see the upside – the middle is where things get accomplished. So I think the fact that this system may wash away the minority views it’s also more likely to work than our current system which misrepresents minority views far more drastically.  Still this is a serious drawback to my plan.  I would be interested to hear other views.

SIXTH.  Parties as a whole will also be voted on.

So for example – I voted for candidates in Green Party and Zoo Party and Garden Club.  But now I need to vote for which of these parties should be able to run ANY candidate in the final election.  Top 4 parties get to move forward.  Obviously there needs to be some kind of popular support existing to end up on a ballot in the first place.  And the current method of signatures of support seems reasonable.

SEVENTH: NO MORE DELEGATES. AND DEFINITELY NO SUPERDELEGATES

The public vote is the only way this game is played. Super Delegates don’t belong in a democracy or, in my opinion, a republic. And the entire delegate system is pointless in this day and age.  Count the votes and be done with it.  Sorry – no more boozy conventions.

 EIGHTH: All states handle primaries the same.

There is no caucus vs primary vs no primary vs closed primary. It’s all a universal system. States manage it, but they can’t make up a bunch of rules that only apply to their state.

NINTH: Primary happens 3 months before the election.

Declaration of Candidacy and any version of open campaigning begins 3 months before Primary. 6 months and the whole nightmare is over for 3.5 years. I’m tempted to lower that to 2 months and 2 months…

I have other ideas on how I would revamp the whole system.  I’m hoping to write those up over the next few days weeks.

What do you think?  Shall we change the broken system?

One of the weird quirks to capitalism is that we have created a separate and NOT equal world of ethics inside of business.

So that we walk into work and we do things that we would NOT do in our personal lives. Things that would be rude or mean or just morally wrong to us in our personal lives are considered OK if it’s in business because the basics of Business Ethics is – make money and do whatever it takes to make money.  We may add in “as long as it isn’t illegal” but ONLY because illegal acts add a cost on it that makes it not profitable.

We think it’s fine to suspend our morals (what we think is right or wrong) when we walk into business because there’s a different code of ethics (rules of conduct) inside those walls.

No one thinks particularly about it.  It’s just how it is.  Many people have made Capitalism into greater moral authority than their particular God.  And they do it without even thinking about it.  Because it is so very prevalent in society.  It’s the Capitalism Exemption.

I think that eventually humans will have to face the vile hypocrisy that we all pretend is not a problem.  But it is.  It’s deeply embedded into some of the biggest problems this world faces, including climate, war, discrimination and poverty.

It’s also something every single one of us sees happening and does everyday in ways we don’t even notice until the big ugly thing happens. Then everyone is sort of weirded out but they nod their heads knowingly – Its Business.  Its OK.

But it’s NOT OK!  If something is morally and ethically wrong – it’s wrong in all parts of this world.  Business is not a parallel universe in which morality can be temporarily suspended so that we can apply Business Ethics to the situation.   The morality of an issue remains the same, even when we ignore it in the name of profit.

I say these things as an non-believer, whose moral compass is somehow managing to ping louder over the moral outrages that are perpetrated inside of business than many of the people who claim a strong belief in a deity.  If those folks wish to continue to hold what they consider to be the high moral ground they need to stop working the Capitalism Exemption.

Indeed, we all need to stop working the Capitalism Exemption.

I re-read and edit my already published posts.  A lot.

If I had the slightest bit of self control, I wouldn’t publish it immediately.  I would re-read and edit it over a couple of days until it met my satisfaction AND THEN publish it.

But I don’t.  I want the drug of feedback from readers.  I crave it.

The 21st century – adding yet another thing I should have some form of willpower over but instead have fallen victim to its addictive nature.

 

I have become inordinately aware of bad driving in the last 3 years.  I mean startlingly bad driving.  At first I was blaming the era of cell/smart phones.  People looking at a phone drive badly.  But they’ve been around for awhile and I just became aware of this prevalent problem in the last 3 years.

Today I was noting that the driving was often deliberately bad.  Running lights, cutting off people to get in a lane, cutting through corner gas stations in order to avoid the light, random u-turns in high traffic areas.  All of this happened today while I was running errands.

I am currently living and working in lower socioeconomic areas and nearly my entire 20 drive to work is through those areas.  The previous 20 years of my life was spent in upper middle income areas.

So I wondered.  And I looked it up.  Yup.  Lower Socioeconomic areas have higher traffic fatalities and accidents.  Lots of studies on the correlation between them. But no real indication about causes.

And really I wonder what causes it.  Was it bad driving education or a general disregard for personal safety and property, or a general disregard for other people’s safety.

I’m aware that when your life crosses a certain line of terribleness you stop feeling much regard for other people generally.  I know that because I experienced it when I was homeless.  I had to consciously fight it and wasn’t particularly successful.  While its probable that everyone’s line of caring about others is in a different level of terribleness, but terribleness does abound in these areas.

I’m also aware that being depressed makes you a worse driver, you are more ruminative and disassociated from your surroundings.  This makes you less aware.

I wonder also how much of it is just owning a thing that is nice makes you want to keep it nice.  If you own a piece of shit car, there’s no need to drive to protect it.

Lots of potential causes, but I have no idea whether any or all or some variable combination is part of the issue.

But it does feel good to know I’m not imagining this really terrible driving I’ve been seeing.

I have now eaten 2 cookies and feel fully qualified to give my naturally biased review.

I’m a bit disappointed.

I’m going to finish the bag.  Obviously.  I’m not disgusted and they ARE Milano, which I maintain are the pinnacle of pre-packaged manufactured cookies.  I think they have no real competition.

However, the current “salted caramel” tastes like a desperate and recently jilted sorority girl.  They are trying to be like anyone who is popular and hiding what is classically wonderful about themselves.

Milano doesn’t need to dip into every fad.  They are timeless and classic.  They need only introduce themselves to each succeeding generation.  They can stand on the recipe and live forever.

They should be above the sort of body shot trampiness that comes from the Oreos side of the aisle.  NOT that I don’t love me some trampy Oreos.  Lets face it.  Tramps are fun.  But if your natural way is not being a tramp, don’t try it.  You cannot compete with double stuffed tramp camp that Oreos works with such genuineness.

Milanos are Genteel Ladies of Easy Virtue and Convenience.  They really don’t know how to work a bar of men for free drinks and possible bathroom sex.  And their attempts at that kind of flash with silly things like “Salted Caramel” don’t always come off.  Better to avoid the embarrassment.

Obviously being genteel is not as much fun a doing flaming body shots with wild bunch of bikers, but not everyone is an Oreo.  And if you’re not, you look like an idiot trying to be.

However, to save them any feelings of awkwardness, I will, of course, finish the bag.  I don’t like to make them feel bad.