The Political Lamp is Lit!

On my blog I rant, probe, question and discuss the political issues of our time. Some of these entries evolve into articles -- opinions, miscellaneous writings, a controversial and provocative 'questionnaire'... plus some unconventional suggestions! Hey, I may be wrong, but I do try to be interesting.

THROUGH STRANGER EYES

Through Stranger Eyes is a new collection of my book reviews, introductions and essays on popular culture, released in the Western Hemisphere by Nimble Press and in the Eastern by Altair Australia. Included: everything from carefully measured views on J.R.R. Tolkien to that infamous, outraged rant about the Star Wars saga! From sober reflections on Jared Diamond's Collapse, and Rebecca Solnit's River of Shadows, to scientific ponderings on Feynman and Gott, along with appraisals of great authors like Brunner, Resnick, Zelazny, Clarke, Verne, and Orwell... all the way to fun riffs on the Matrix and Buffy! More than two dozen reviews and commentaries that are sure to enlighten, entertain, possibly infuriate, and even make you laugh, but above all, offer some perspectives you never imagined before.

Talking to Ostriches

Do you know an ostrich -- a principled conservative who refuses to see that the current cabal running their party is the antithesis of principled conservatism? We need to begin a dialogue with such people: help them pull their heads out of the sand and look fearlessly at what they can do to restore dignity and honor to their party.

"With the very survival of Constitutional government and the American Experiment at stake, we cannot afford to leave this to simpleminded partisanship. Our opportunity -- and obligation -- is to rip open Karl Rove's 'big tent conservative coalition.' To pry it apart -- one person at a time -- by approaching millions of decent fellow citizens who were duped into supporting a criminal gang."

Getting Ready for 2008

Should I keep to topics I'm paid to talk about, like the future? Given the times, can I be forgiven the occasional opinionated rant? Take the problem of gerrymandering, which I examine from a dozen fresh perspectives. Another in-depth essay reappraises Newt Gingrich's 1994 Contract With America, considering how this masterful piece of 20th Century political polemic might be used by the other side, in the 21st. Also, is it prudent to overstretch our military reserves in a war that is, at-best, a case of international elective surgery? These viewpoints are not classically partisan, but seek a broader view. Whether you agree or not, I promise to be interesting!

"Liberals who feel only contempt for the Neoconservative Revolution and no grudging respect are deluding themselves and hurting their own cause by not studying how that revolution was achieved. Ask yourself the fundamental question: whose tactics have achieved power, and whose tactics have not? The neocons' relentless march from post-Watergate nadir to unprecedented dominion should be studied carefully, even by those who want to turn America away from amoral ruthlessness."

How Progressives Can Win Back America

As a companion piece to "The Republican Party's Neocon Re-Invention" (and written in response to the SEIU's online contest at sinceslicedbread.com), "How Progressives Can Win Back America" proposes concrete plans for how the Democrats can regain majority status -- and win the respect of the electorate!

"The ideas I plan to propose are all aimed at one end: creating win-win situations for the Democratic Party or its candidates. In other words, situations within which even failure will have positive effects. In several cases, I can offer more extended articles about the subject in question. I can especially offer a careful analysis of Republican innovations, and how the Democrats have fallen for them."

How Libertarians Can Win Back America

Most libertarians know - far better than others - that the hoary old left-right political spectrum is worse than useless. Alas, some of the “better alternatives” only serve to muddy the waters. In this article I suggest a few new models that may be helpful... if taken with a grain of salt.

Mutant Republicans

What makes the Republicans so successful at building coalitions? How are they able to bring together groups that -- on the surface -- have nothing in common? And can the Democratic Party emulate their methods without adopting their abhorrent politics?

"Republicans began their own long journey of re-appraisal in the wake of Barry Goldwater's crushing defeat in 1964, then intensified their efforts after the debacle of Watergate. William F. Buckley, during the 1964 campaign, recognized the dominance of liberalism at that time. He urged that conservatives see themselves as 'well-planted seeds of hope, which will flower on a great November day in the future, if there is a future.' Soon, concentrated efforts began, at places like the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute, to forge networks of expertise in theory, policy and political operations, filling in every component for a vigorous new age of conservatism."

Isn't It Time to Repair Our Guard?

I also wrote this article after the Hurricane Katrina debacle, asking that the Guard and Reserves be returned to the United States -- to do the jobs they are trained to do!

"Can anyone honestly claim that we're better prepared, today, to deal with a surprise attack, or an urgent call for help from some ally, than we were before 9/11? Or, in fact, any other kind of emergency? Would our allies now be more ready to leap to our aid than before 2001? Or much less so?"

The 2006 Election: Swinging From Optimism...

I recently posted a few thoughts about how the incoming U.S. Congress might change the nation's way of doing business. (Many of these unconventional proposals may sound good to both conservatives and liberals.)

"This important little victory will be meaningless if it's botched, or implemented without imagination, or else with a mean-spirited zealotry that plays into the hands of those who want perpetual "culture war." It is the tradition of pragmatic problem-solving that is at stake here, not any one left-or-right game plan."

... To Pessimism

Now it's time for something much darker, more cynical, and maybe even a little paranoid! Come take a look at a chillingly plausible way that powerful forces may try to affect our politics by using the age-old trick of blackmail.

"All of you enthusiastic neophytes to national power, this may be the very moment for a little protective paranoia. Always remember that some powerful people will see you as a threat to their interests. Some of the more unscrupulous may seek to neutralize that threat, using some classic methods known across history."

America's Other Culture War

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, I've posted this essay about how disasters are worsened when professionals and citizens interfere with each other. Another essay discusses Proxy Activism, a convenient way modern folks can hire others to save the world for them. Finally, there's a notion (cribbed from my novel Earth) about how it might be time to let the Mississippi take its natural path to the sea. (Note: all of these have been discussed on my blog.)"

"I have called New Orleans the "anti-9/11" because these two tragedies illustrate diametrically opposite sides of the same lesson. When resilient citizens feel empowered, they can be prodigious assets in a crisis. When resilient, self-organized citizen action is actively quashed, any crisis will deepen."

An Alliance We Could Live With

Here's an idea for the 21st Century: Why don't all reasonable people break free of the left-right stranglehold imposed on us by less-reputable politicians and form an Alliance for the Modern World?

"One approach may be to form coalitions that agree to promote -- boldly and openly -- a dozen consensus agenda items, and refuse to be drawn into other fights. Is it possible to negotiate a list of desiderata that all modernist defenders of the Enlightenment might stand behind? Something that John McCain, William F. Buckley and George Will might sign, alongside Gary Wills, Jared Diamond and Al Gore?"

The Real Culture War

I posted a final essay about the recent, traumatic 2004 political season -- another layered appraisal of "The Real Culture War," showing how obsolete and irrelevant the hoary old "left-right axis" has become. What appears to be dividing America, instead, is the issue of modernity. Whether progress is either possible or desirable. "Moderates" who stand, tormented, between fanatical poles of left and right are not different because their views are more tepid. They are different because many are capable of believing in science, in human improvability, and in tomorrow. My suggestions cater to neither liberal dogmans nor conservative ideologies. They are pragmatic. They serve the Enlightenment. Comments and criticism are welcome at my blog: davidbrin.blogspot.com.

"None of the observations that I just offered can be made to fit the most pervasive, misleading and mind-numbing political metaphor of all time -- the left-right political axis.... That purported "political map" has always trivialized complex issues, masking a myriad inconsistencies, contradictions and details. It also defied decades of scientific evidence for how complex human brains, personalities and societies really are. Yet, we cling to an obsolete oversimplification that has proved effective at just one thing -- enforcing alliance between people who disagree deeply over things that really matter."

America Was Neo-Conned!

See a few unabashedly political essays that I posted just before the 2004 election. One of them, "War in the 21st Century," is specifically about the election and whether "Pax Americana" is a viable concept for the next few decades. (I think it is, but only if led by grownups.) The other is a more abstract dissection of a weird alliance that makes up the neoconservative movement, and how is actually works tacitly with radical Muslims and other romantic forces in "Neoconservatism, Islam & Ideology."

"I plan to show that the problem of Saddam Hussein -- which was largely created by members of this administration over the course of decades -- did indeed need to be solved. But the Administration had its own reasons for stoking "emergency" passions rather than calmly pursuing planned consensus toward elective surgery under circumstance of our convenience. They did this with lies, deliberately stoked panic, divisiveness, immaturity and utter devotion to their own benefit."

Quick-Fix the Electoral College

Other essays in my ongoing "2004 political season" series span a range of ideas: in the first, I proposed we reform the Electoral College without tinkering with the Constitution.

"It turns out that the Electoral College, per se, is not what distorts the system so badly. It is the winner-takes-all method of allocating each state's electors."

Why Stipulation Works

In my second essay in my ongoing "politics" series, I proposed that the candidates from both major parties should stipulate, or "agree to agree" about a set of issues.

"What's wrong with the idea of two leaders finding a patch of consensus amid a sea of discord? We cheer when this occurs among heads of state, overcoming differences between nations in order to sign a treaty that finds common ground. Then why not between candidates?"

Why Can't We Talk?

In my third essay, I proposed we acknowledge that the winning candidate of modern-day Presidential elections typically does not earn more than 50% of the vote, and should honor the losing majority by meeting with -- and listening to -- a delegation from the opposing majority.

"Such a pledge would cost a candidate and president little to make or to fulfill. There is no obligation to act on what the delegations say, only to be accessible, listening occasionally to more than one ideology. More than one brain trust of cloned advisors."

Speaking to Libertarians

A number of organizations, spanning the spectrum of interest and politics, have been interested in my specialty -- the questioning of deep-seated assumptions. (Hey, a good SF author is paid to poke at clichés!) After dozens of 'unconventional' consultations, this keynote speech, given before the Libertarian Party National Convention (7/02), was finally transcribed. Beyond specifics aimed at that group, you may find the perspectives unusual and thought provoking, whatever your specific political beliefs!

"I do not believe that any 'Golden Age" lies in our past. The story of the last six thousand years was almost unrelenting misery, bullying and woe. I wake up encouraged every day that barbarians have not burned my house and that some king has not taken my daughter. So encouraged that I have to admit that my fellow citizens simply cannot be as stupid as they look! So encouraged that I peer forward to a day when coercion has become a faint memory. To a time when all children are equipped with the skills and tools to be formidable beings, fully capable of making all decisions for themselves, aided by a mere wisp of residual government that continues to wither gradually as sovereign adults wean themselves of its services, not through rancor or ingratitude, but by the simple, revolutionary step of learning to treat each other like grownups."

A Genius of the 20th Century

Read my year 2000 essay nominating my own choice for "Person of the Twentieth Century," along with follow-up discussion that took place on Slashdot.

"Only a handful of the top twenty made a decisively positive difference to world history, instigating profound and universally recognized changes for the better. People like Dr. King, Winston Churchill, Nelson Mandela and Henry Ford certainly deserve mention. But in my opinion, none of the flamboyant top candidates altered the course of human civilization as much as one quiet man who was never an entertainer, religious figure, or chief of state."

Hate Crimes

See my article titled "Names That Live In Infamy" in Salon, proposing a solution to hate crimes -- take away the motivation!

"Two millennia ago, in the Hellenistic era, a young man torched one of the seven wonders of the ancient world -- the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. When caught and asked why, he replied first with grievances against individuals and his city state, then admitted that he really wanted to make a mark, to be remembered. Since he wasn't a great warrior, or creative person, his best chance was to gain infamy by destroying something."

My Informal Questionnaire

As a "noted futurist," I'm often invited to speak about the 21st Century (and beyond) before groups as diverse as libertarians, feminists, democrats, venture capitalists, scientists and environmentalists. Lately, many thoughtful people find the new millennium daunting and sobering. Will bitter ideological rifts dominate the new century, as they did in the 20th? Or might we shrug off some of the obsolete intellectual baggage we've inherited from past thinkers who (in fact) knew much less than we do now?

In a spirit of re-evaluation, how about taking a fresh look at some fundamentals? Might there be some basic questions that haven't been asked adequately, especially by those who fervently cry out that their answer is the only answer to vexing human problems? Do we really want to find startling areas of common ground between folks who now see each other as implacable foes?

I have appended a questionnaire meant to illuminate why you feel as you do about modern issues... and why it seems so hard to comprehend those who disagree. The questions are provocative... any two or more people should find a lot to discuss, just by asking them of each other. Moreover your answers may have implications that go deeper than you think! Some of the ticklers approach familiar dilemmas from unusual angles, ripping across familiar boundaries, such as the hoary old left-right political axis.

Many of you will already have read my nonfiction book, The Transparent Society, and my novel Earth. If so, you know I discuss several of these points therein. I also plan on writing an essay soon, following up on this questionnaire. Meanwhile, any of you are welcome to run it past your own groups/friends/co-conspirators, in order to see for yourself how people sort themselves in surprising ways.

The implications are especially crucial to some of the groups I mentioned above. Groups who have my sympathy... but who also provoke endless frustration as they keep relentlessly chewing over the same old fixations, even when the evidence around us shows that it's time to move on!

In any event, I hope you'll find the questions entertaining... and provocative.