All posts by Walther

Commentary

Sometimes it takes an Oil Man…

7 Comments

Is it just me or has T. Boone Pickens bitch slapped the entire environmental movement?  Pickens has done what an army of environmentalists never could: create momentum behind a national renewable energy initiative.  The Pickens Plan is a massive wind power initiative.  He wants to get America generating 20% of it’s power from our wind corridor in the middle of the country.  With that new electricity in the grid, Pickens thinks we can stop using natural gas in power plants and start using it in cars.  Thus we can free ourselves from the burdens of foreign oil.  I doubt things will go down like that but the fact is, he wants to strengthen our power grid and create a massive amount of renewable wind energy.  I dig it.

This man also gets things done.  This is the email update I got from him:

“We have big, big news! The Pickens Plan Pledge is ready and is already in the hands of EVERY Member of Congress. Every United States Senator. And every Governor.

Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico signed the pledge on Wednesday. Remember, Gov. Richardson was a Secretary of Energy, so he knows what the Pickens Plan is all about and he knows what it means to America.”

While the liberals complained, this Texas oil man acted. Thank you T. Boone.

…

Should we forgive him for financing the disgusting Swift Boat ads that sunk the Kerry campaign?

Commentary, Walther

An Alliance between the Real “Change” and “Maverick” Candidates

1 Comment

What happens when you cross anti-corporate hippy socialists with anti-government conservative libertarians?  The most surprising (and interesting) political alliance of my lifetime.  Ron Paul and Ralph Nader have come together over four core issues neglected by the mainstream parties and media and discussed these ideas with Wolf Blitzer on the Situation Room.  The following is the agreement from Ralph Nader’s website.  Excuse the odd use of bold and underlining, Nader is a quirky dude.

We Agree

Foreign Policy: The Iraq War must end as quickly as possible with removal of all our soldiers from the region. We must initiate the return of our soldiers from around the world, including Korea, Japan, Europe and the entire Middle East. We must cease the war propaganda, threats of a blockade and plans for attacks on Iran, nor should we re-ignite the cold war with Russia over Georgia. We must be willing to talk to all countries and offer friendship and trade and travel to all who are willing. We must take off the table the threat of a nuclear first strike against all nations.

Privacy: We must protect the privacy and civil liberties of all persons under US jurisdiction. We must repeal or radically change the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, and the FISA legislation. We must reject the notion and practice of torture, eliminations of habeas corpus, secret tribunals, and secret prisons. We must deny immunity for corporations that spy willingly on the people for the benefit of the government. We must reject the unitary presidency, the illegal use of signing statements and excessive use of executive orders.

The National Debt: We believe that there should be no increase in the national debt. The burden of debt placed on the next generation is unjust and already threatening our economy and the value of our dollar. We must pay our bills as we go along and not unfairly place this burden on a future generation.

The Federal Reserve: We seek a thorough investigation, evaluation and audit of the Federal Reserve System and its cozy relationships with the banking, corporate, and other financial institutions. The arbitrary power to create money and credit out of thin air behind closed doors for the benefit of commercial interests taxpayer bailouts of corporations and no corporate subsidies. Corporations should be aggressively prosecuted for their crimes and frauds.

We support opening up the debates beyond the two parties and the Commission on Presidential Debates (CPD), a private corporation co-chaired by former chairmen of the Republican and Democratic Party. It is time for our Presidential Debates to once again be hosted by a truly non-partisan civic-minded association.

As the mainstream ‘Change’ and ‘Maverick’ candidates continue their collective transformation into conventional politicians, it’s nice to see what real change would look like and who the real mavericks are.

If you haven’t watch Ron Paul give a speech, you’ll be shocked by his level headedness, philosophical consistency and candor.  His Rally for the Republic Convention Speech was great.  If you’re curious about the principles of Ron Paul’s libertarianism, watch his amazing discussion @ Google.

Walther

Three Commercials We Should Make for Barack

5 Comments

Alright Barack, when I gave you my support well over a year ago, I assumed you’d be able to handle these Republican fools with a swift shot of truth serum.  I know these polls are generally BS, but the media tone is clearly changing.  Right now you look like a sour puss.  Show those naysayers you know how to fight!

Commercial One: Sarah Palin’s New Book

“How many interviews did it take for you to get your job?  If your answer is ‘more than one,’ you should buy Sarah Palin’s new book: ‘How to convince someone you can be President in under two hours.’  In this fascinating page turner, Sarah Palin explains how she did the impossible: convince John McCain that she could be President of the United States after only one meeting.  Buy it now and you’ll receive Cindy McCain’s “How to steal another woman’s husband in a one night or less” absolutely free!

Commercial Two:The Meaning of Forgiveness

Let me tell you a story about Senator McCain’s amazing capacity to forgive.  In 2000, John McCain ran against George W Bush in the Republican primary.  John ran an amazing grassroots, issue based campaign.  His honesty was infectious as liberals and conservatives came together around his underdog candidacy.  Everything was looking great until, at the last minute, Bush’s campaign created a fictitious story about John having an illegitimate black baby.  Instead of getting upset like most Americans would about that malicious lie, John showed us all the true meaning of forgiveness.  Not only did he honorably serve President Bush in the Senate for the next 8 years, but he actually hired the same men who fabricated the illegitimate child story to run his next campaign for president.  John McCain’s stunning act of forgiveness is an inspiration to us all and one of the many reasons he is a true maverick”

Commercial Three: A Thank You Note to Small Town America

Dear America,

Thank you so much for the prosperity of the last few decades.  I know it must have been hard to see the factories shut down, the stores on main street close and the kids leave but you’re sacrifice has allowed America’s cities to become stronger.  To be honest, we were surprised you folks wanted less regulation in the financial services industry, allowing Wall Street to get rich by sending American money oversees.  We know it’s because you love free-market economics just like us.  We were also surprised when you decided to cut taxes for the wealthiest Americans because, if you haven’t noticed, nearly all of us live in coastal ‘blue’ states.  We were also surprised by the warmth of your small town hospitality when you welcomed our big city mayor and Fortunate 500 CEOs to your convention so they could tell you how grateful we, America’s urban elite, are for your hatred of us.

Keep the surprises (and the tax cuts) coming in 2008. Vote Republican.

Walther

Apple will be taking over your TV soon

2 Comments

Most people in the Applephile world know that Apple is making an announcement tomorrow.  Since predicting Apple’s next moves is a celebrated past time for those who pretend to know what’s going on in tech, I’ll thow in my two cents while I still can.

Everyone is talking about new iPods.  Fuck that.  I’m sure they’ll have some nicely designed new iPods but unless they’ve figured out a way to incorporate a lighter and bottle opener into the design, they won’t make any iPhone users into iPod buyers.

What I’m waiting for, and hoping for, is that they combine their Mac Mini, Time Machine wireless internet/hard drive device and Apple TV into a single box top device that sits by your TV.  It should do the following:

Play steaming internet video.

Give me an innovative new keyboard that finally makes my TV into a useful computer.

Backs up all your computers wirelessly.

Hold all my media (audio, video, photos) and wirelessly send it to airport express like devices that I can  place by my other TVs and stereos.

Has communication functionality built into it.

Is all controlled via iPhone or iPod touch

Not give me cancer by filling my house with tons of radio waves.

I hope to see my brand new Apple iPort (?) tomorrow… and maybe an iPhone nano.

Commentary

Questionable Hiring Practices at the McCain Camp

3 Comments

A tanker of ink will be spilled over the qualifications of Sarah Palin to be President of the United States of America.  People will analyze everything she’s said while in office and everything she will say throughout the campaign.  Many different authors will write many different life narratives for Sarah, ranging from the glowing to the ghastly.  Her relatives and friends will be contacted by the press and they’ll tell stories that reveal her character traits beyond the “Sarah Baracuda” that’s already been widely reported.  Reports will continue to surface about ‘troopergate‘, her pregnant 17 year old daughter and the father of the child.  (“I live to play hockey. I like to go camping and hang out with the boys, do some fishing, shoot some s- – – and just f – – -in’ chillin’ I guess.”)  This wealth of media-worthy material will likely obscure the most important aspect of the Palin story. John McCain is a fool for picking a stranger to be his VP.

We all get wrapped up in the political circus as it unfolds before us, but every now and then we need to remember that the President is the most powerful person in the world.  John McCain was willing to give that power to someone he met only twice, and only once in person.  Only a fool would believe that a single, one on one interview is enough to determine whether or not someone could be President of this country.  John McCain proved to be that fool.

It isn’t as if McCain had no one else to chose from.  It was widely reported how McCain wanted to run with Joe Liberman or Tom Ridge.  Both were people with whom McCain was exceedingly familiar and both are at least superficially qualified. Unfortunately, neither was a friend of the Evangelicals.  Instead of opting to do the ‘maverick’ thing and picking someone he trusted, McCain opted for the quick political fix.  After an amazingly brief vetting process, he chose an attractive woman who is  highly regarded among Evangelicals.  He disregarded the fact that he is placing a stranger (someone he does not know) one martin olive away from the Presidency.  I know it sounds glib, but seriously: how could John McCain be so callous about America’s insurance policy against his death?  You may love McCain, but I don’t think it’s logically possible to argue that he picked someone he was confident could lead America if something happened to him.  Unless he looked into Palin’s soul like Bush looked into Putin’s, I think he’s going to have an extremely difficult time explaining to Americans that Sarah Palin was chosen for anything other than the most desperate political reasons.  I hope people will remember that even in today’s cynical poltical environment, the VP is more than a political shoehorn for a presidential candidate: she is an insurance policy.  I, for one, am not comfortable with Sarah Palin being the McCain Presidency’s insurance policy and as more information about her is revealed to the public, I think it’ll be clear that McCain was never comfortable with his selection either.

Walther

Why Georgia Matters

4 Comments

First, let me just say people need to more closely monitor what Tom Clancy has to say because he called this conflict in Georgia a long time ago in the fantastic video game Ghost Recon.  Don’t worry.  America wins in the end.  He also wrote a novel about terrorists flying a jumbo jet into the capital building during the state of the union way before 9/11.  The man is really on top of things.

Of course, the US media performed admirably in telling the story of Georgia.  Here is the narrative I heard:  The Russians attacked Georgian cities and infrastructure, killing thousands of civilians in response to Georgian attacks in South Ossetia against Pro-Russian paramilitary units.  The Russian response was overwhelmingly harsh and John McCain swiftly and decisively called on the Russians to withdraw immediately or face the full might of American force.

Of course, this sounds normal to those of us in America because, at the end of the day, there is no such thing as history and everything in the world revolves around how US presidential candidates respond to events.

First, a little context.  Georgia has a significant oil pipeline that transports the black gold from Azerbaijan’s Caspian Sea oil fields to Turkey and the Mediterranean (and thus the western world) while bypassing Russia (yay!) and Armenia who is officially at war with Azerbaijan.That’s one reason people care about Georgia, but there is another reason this story is interesting and that brings us to the Republic of Kosovo’s recent independence from Serbia.

The global community has not come to an agreement about separatist movements.  When does a domestic separatist movement, many of which use terrorism as a weapon, become legitimate?  When can that territory declare itself free from their current home-nation and create their own.  The US and the West said ‘we decide’ this month when they recognized the Republic of Kosovo after it officially broke away from Serbia.

This separatist issue doesn’t really effect Americans, unless Hawaii decides to bounce, but other major world powers like Russia and China, as well as Pakistan, India, Spain, Israel and many more all have territories that would like to start their own countries.  Despite international guidelines that vaguely outline when a territory can secede, in reality its American and NATO that decides who can legitimately secede and who can’t.  See the Kosovo example.

The Russians, who strongly supported the Serbian effort to keep Kosovo officially within Serbia have a bunch of small territories that want to secede, notably the Chechens.  So when America and the West declared they call the shots over Kosovo, the Russian were infuriated.  That type of precendent could stoke the fire of many seperatist movements the world over, especially in Chechnya.

What makes the Georgian story so interesting is the Russians basically did the same thing the US did in Kosovo.  They support the separation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia.  These territories would then become satellite states of Russia or be annexed and join the Russian Federation.  The thing is, it sounds like most people living in these areas want to leave Georgia and join Russia.  (I’d love to see a reliable poll.)  Should we let them self-determine?

Walther

8 Reasons McCain Needs a Miracle to Win

10 Comments

John McCainIf you’ve been watching the news for the last month, it seems like John McCain might actually pull out a victory in November.  After months of the press fawning over the unlikely candidacy of Obama (remember, he’s a mixed race junior senator with no executive experience) the press has rediscovered that John McCain actually has the credentials, the political persona and the charisma of a fantastic presidential candidate.  Unfortunately for Senator McCain, he simply doesn’t have the support.  Despite popular polls numbers (this isn’t a popular election after all, it is a state by state winner take all contest) and a receptive media, eight national trends would make a John McCain victory miraculous.

Voter Registration

The Republicans are losing more and more registered voters to the Democrats and independents while the Democrats are registering unprecedented numbers of young, black and formerly disenfranchised voters.
Real Clear Politics states: “The number of registered Democrats in party registration states has grown by nearly 700,000 since President George W. Bush was reelected in November 2004, while the total of registered Republicans has declined by almost 1 million.”
The changes are most notable in Iowa and Nevada, two states that were majority Republican in 2004 (and voted for Bush) and now have more registered Democrats.  The other 5 states with growing democratic advantages are Oregon (10pts), New Jersey (14pts), New Hampshire (-.6pts), Connecticut (15pts) and Pennsylvania (12pts).
By most accounts, the Obama campaign machine has been impeccably organized, and it isn’t hard to understand why the Republican machine is failing.  Quite simply,  being a Republican is no longer as cool as it used to be.  As the Economist so aptly noted a year ago, no matter how clever the Republicans are at politics, at the end of the day when they were given the chance to lead, they failed.

Organization

Obama has 336 open offices while McCain has just 101. While field offices, like voter registration, doesn’t directly correlate to voters, one has to wonder where the McCain campaign will base their get-out the vote operations when the election arrives.  More specifically interestingly, McCain has 1 office in Colorado and 1 in Pennsylvania while Obama has 10 and 18 respectfully.

Independents

The 1.7m net loss net of Republicans since 2004 means independents are more important for McCain.  Historically he has garnered much support from independents but Obama is denying him an advantage as polls show them neck and neck.

Millennial Generation

One day, the Millenials, which are Americans under the age of 26 and are the largest generation in American history, (over 100m) will dominate American politics.  Obama has a massive advantage amount youth and his campaign has vigorously registered and engaged this demographic.  Whether or not this is the election that will permanently shift America politics from the Boomers to the Millennials, it’s clear that Obama has the age demographic advantage as there are nearly twice as many 18-30 year olds than there are people over 65.  For more go try USA Today and Wikipedia.

Latinos

While Hispanics gave Bush an advantage in 2004 by giving him 40% of their vote, McCain will be disadvantaged by the fastest growing demographic in America.   Obama has a massive lead of 3:1 (63% to 23%) among Hispanics.

Evangelicals

McCain is polling at 61% support among Evangelicals while Bush won 69%.  They aren’t going to Obama, who has the same 25% Kerry had in 2004, they’re simply deciding to sit this one out.  Why?  Many of their leaders want to disengage from American politics while others are under the influence of a right wing media that has historically despised Senator McCain.

Rush Limbaugh

America’s second most listened to talk show host (all hail Howard) thinks McCain sucks and hasn’t and will not motivate his listeners to vote for him.  In fact, he often threatens to work against McCain if McCain doesn’t veer more towards the right.

Read this transcript from his show:
RUSH: Because [the Republican Party] thinks that they own us, in the most crucial of earlier decisions, McCain is misjudging us. He feels he can pick whoever he wants, pro-choice Democrat running mate, and that everybody’s just going to march with him. But he figures wrong.  This is going to be a close election, and it’s not going to take a lot of people sitting on their hands to lose an important state or two.

CALLER: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH:  Now, Obama is out there firing up his base.  McCain is trying to deflate people like you.

CALLER:  He’s angering us, and I wasn’t going to vote for him. I was just not going to mark anything, but then when he pulled this — and I think, Rush, I really think — and I know you’ve done so much to get the word out. I really think that if he puts on a good, strong conservative, he has a pretty good chance of getting elected. But if he doesn’t, then the Republicans are going to say, “What’s the difference between him and B. Hussein Obama?”  And they either won’t vote or I don’t know, and it’s really scary and I’m worried about it.  I don’t like McCain; I never have liked him.

Bush’s victory was consistent with years of right wing media narration.  Those same people have been skewering McCain for a decade.  Now if they wanted to do an about face and support McCain, they would risk alienating their own audiences.

Libertarians

Ron Paul’s revolution is continuing via Bob Barr, a former popular Republican who turned to the Libertarian party and was polling at 6%. Unlike Nader who was a simply protest vote in 2000 and 2004, Barr and Paul, while not officially linked, are both aiming to realign the Republican party around an authentic small government platform.  Paul and his followers are vigorously organizing the “Campaign for Liberty” which will create a constituency that could support a real libertarian third party or could begin to realign the Republican party.   Paul has frequently stated he won’t support McCain unless McCain fundamentally changes his platform.  There will be no better way for the libertarians to flex their political muscle than resisting a McCain’s presidency.

Real Clear Politics Electoral Projections

Conclusion
As I see it, McCain is disadvantaged by national political trends, he lacks a competitive ground organization, he isn’t dominating the independent vote, he has an age demographic problem, he has a latino problem, an African American problem, an Evangelical problem and isn’t garnering support from right wing media celebrities.  Finally, there is a large and growing consistency within his party that would prefer to lose this election and return the Republican party to a small government platform than continue with business as usual.

Least we forget, the media is a business and they would prefer to have a ‘horse race’ political campaign going than inform Americans of the massive demographic hurtles McCain faces.  They would also prefer to report on national poll numbers that represent the insignificant popular vote than look at state by state numbers that clearly show an Obama advantage.  Take a moment to go through Real Clear Politics electoral college and see for yourself.

Walther

Obama Willing to Compromise on Oil Drilling

11 Comments

So Barack Obama just reversed his hard line stance against offshore drilling. I genuinely hate offshore drilling.  It’s advocates say it does three things: lower the price of oil, promote US energy security and buy us time for alternative fuels. BS.

First, oil companies are the only one’s who will benefit from expanded drilling because they’ll make billions selling the new oil into a marketplace that fluctuates like the emotions of a teenager.  The oil won’t affect gas prices for a decade and who knows where they’ll be in so many years.  Oil drilling promotes energy security like buying another beer promotes a responsible drinking habit.  It won’t ‘buy us time’ for alternative fuels, it will buy oil more time to dominate our economy. Everyone knows we’re addicted to oil, and everyone knows the best way to end an addiction is to stop using the product.

Despite my dislike for off-shore drilling, I’m not infuriated by Obama’s shift. He says: “If, in order to get [a comprehensive energy bill] passed, we have to compromise in terms of a careful, well thought out drilling strategy that was carefully circumscribed to avoid significant environmental damage – I don’t want to be so rigid that we can’t get something done.”

When Obama says he’s a different kind of politician, people haven’t really investigated what that means. It means Obama is a compromiser and a deal maker, not an ideologue and not heavily opinionated. While to many this “flip-flop” seems like a display of weakness or political pandering, I think it shows that he has his priorities straight. Right now, this nation’s first objective should be a strong, consistent, well-supported energy policy with ambitious but achievable objectives. Bipartisan support is essential for an effective plan. If the Republicans and 70% of Americans support drilling for more oil, even if that support is manufactured by the oil companies pr strategies, then Obama is willing to compromise to make sure the bigger objective is achieved.

Unconventional politics is compromising with your adversary even when you have an advantage. That is the way long term solutions are created. Unfortunately, many Democrats are having buyer’s remorse. They see a strong Obama and a strong Democratic party, and they want to shove policies down Republicans’ throats. That’s conventional politics and the path to more ineffective government. Resist that urge, compromise and make real progress. An ambitious national energy policy is more important than a few additional oil rigs in the Gulf.

Walther

NYTimes a Mouthpiece Advocating Disastrous Afghan Narco Policy

5 Comments

This week’s NYTimes Sunday Magazine had a silly/destructive article titled “Is Afghanistan a Narco State?”  Quick answer: obviously yes.  It was written by Thomas Schweich, a professor at Wash U and a drug warrior extraordinaire who seems to believe that advancing America’s failed drug war policies in Afghanistan is more important than stabilizing that troubled nation.  Shweich is another delusional  drug warrior and his presence in the NYTimes shows, once again, that the newspaper of record is asleep at the wheel.

This poorly argued and illogical article should never have made it to the Times.Schweich five pages are summed up when he complains how “an odd cabal of timorous (nervous) Europeans, myopic (lack of imagination) media outlets, corrupt Afghanis (including nearly everyone in the current Afghan government), blinkered (?) Pentagon officers, politically motivated Democrats and the Taliban were preventing the implementation of an effective counterdrug program.”  It’s true: everyone is against his plan to implement an aerial eradication program to destroy Afghan poppis.  But why?  First, it’s important to note that when he says ‘effective counterdrug program’ he is using the $5 billion Columbia eradication program as a benchmark of success.  The same day this article was published the NYTimes also published this interesting article that deems the Columbian eradication program a failure. Second, you can ask any New York hipster about the price of blow on the street and they’ll smile very big.  More surprising than his faith in his silly/destructive program is his near comic confusion as to why all these forces won’t allow him to use planes to spray herbicide over thousands of areas of Afghani farms.

To him, the calculation is simple:
Less poppy = less opium = less money for the Taliban and fewer drugs on the street.  Unfortunately the world is slightly more complex.

The Army hates his plan because they know that:
American led destruction of Afghan property = angry Afghans = more Taliban sympathizers = more dead American soldiers and a more difficult war.

Economists hate his plan because they know that:
Less Afghan poppy = unmet demand for opium = more south Asian poppy = no change on the street.

Clearly Schweich isn’t familiar with that economic reasoning because he was surprised when the South Asia Office in the Pentagon ‘made an about face’ and resisted his aerial eradication program.  Obviously, they didn’t want to watch their hard work evaporate as the poppy crop rushed back into their area of responsibility.

I’d like to leave the reader with the following undisputed information.  The Netherlands, like many developed nations, had a growing number of heroine addicts.  Instead of increasing the jail time for addicts or venturing around the word trying to kill other people’s crops, they began selling heroine themselves and even helped addicts administer the potentially lethal drug.   The number of addicts has been going down ever since.  The Dutch realized that if addicts get their fix from health care professional instead of back alley drug dealers, addicts are many many times more likely to be convinced to enter treatment.  They have the best of both worlds: less heroine addicts and less taxpayer expense.  That policy is now being used in British Columbia, Switzerland and Germany.

Finding English language mainstream media information about such programs is difficult but the NYTimes mentions them here, the alternative press here and the medical press here.

At the end of his article, Schweich proposes a ‘simple plan’ to eliminate heroine productions in Afghanistan:
1. Force Karzai to have a zero tolerance policy.  (Everyone paying attention knows this will lead to Karzai’s defeat in the next election to a candidate who resists US destruction of his constituents’ property.)
2. ‘Enable force-eradication.’  (This would entail the Afghan army spending its resources and risking their lives to destroy the crops of their fellow countrymen.)
3. Increase the amount of DEA in Kabul. (Shocker.)
4. Fund development and education projects.  (I advocate this one.  Smoking opium is a sin in Islam and the culture should prevent more farmers from planting it.)
5. Ask the allies to help.  (The allies hate US drug policy so I won’t hold my breadth.)

I have a simpler plan.
1. Treat Afghani opiates like we treat the multinational pharmaceutical companies’ opiates (OxyCodone, Vicodin, Codine and the hundreds of others).  Regulate it, tax it and follow the Dutch plan for distribution.

As soon as you regulate instead of criminalize drugs, the (violent) black market disappears.  The Taliban would lose their primary source of revenue and the Afghan people would respect us because we would be respecting them.  Of course, Thomas Schweich would prefer the US government legislating international morality (and legislating it ineffectively) instead of winning the war in Afghanistan.  He needs a little perspective.

I suggest reading the article on Colombian eradication of cocoa.  It shows, once again, that the black market is creating violence in Columbia and, now that FARC is on the decline, smaller groups are filling the void with their own drug-money-fueled armies.  It’s a sad state of affairs.

Highlights, Walther

Graphing Democracy in 3D

Leave a comment

We spend a lot of time talking about democracy but very little time actually defining it.  Democracy comes from the Greek words ‘demos’ (people) and ‘kratos’ (power.)  For many centuries after the collapse of the Athenian democracy and the Greek and Roman Republics, democracy (people power) was synonymous with mob rule, chaos and insecurity.  Many assumed that a majority rule democracy would oppress minorities.  This fear was one of the elements that encouraged America’s founding fathers to institute the electoral college and create the Senate.

Due to widespread overuse and misinterpretation, many political scientists prefer the term polyarchy, which means ‘many rule’ over the term democracy.  ‘Polyarchy’ is the title of a seminal political science book by Robert Dahl.  In this book, Dahl proposes that all governments have two variables – competitiveness and inclusiveness – and can be placed on a graph with those two axis.

Competitiveness asks who can compete for political office. Robert Dahl's polyarchy graph from 1971 America’s competitiveness is much lower than Israel’s because America’s two mainstream political parties effectively prevent people with diverse perspectives from running for office while Israel’s multi-party coalition system enables almost anyone to run.

Inclusiveness asks who can vote. America does much better than Israel here because all American citizens can vote while only Israeli citizens can vote – excluding the non-citizen Palestinians who live on Israeli occupied lands.

Dahl’s definition of polyarchy is good, but not complete.  His graph doesn’t account for the most powerful force in politics:  information distribution.  Those who control access to information have tremendous political power.  They can amplify certain elements within society and silence others.  They can create the illusion of competitiveness and inclusiveness, amplify certain social elements while silencing others, and create false narratives.  Information is power and it must be included in Dahl’s analysis, but how?

Three important questions arise when thinking about information: who can create it, how is it distributed and how can it be applied.  The first question is technical: does the population have access to information creation tools?  The second is technical/cultural: who has the technology to distribute it and the cultural capital  needed to get people to pay attention?  The third is entirely cultural: what can individuals, communities and organizations do with the information they process?

Transparency is the key component that addresses all of these questions as one.  Transparency requires everyone have the ability to create, distribute and use information.  There is no barrier between a totally transparent government and the society it serves.  In that instance, government and society become one.  Institutions are a third element in the transparency matrix.  Their existence ensures that a totally transparent government will never exist.  However, by intelligently using network technologies, we can get close.

When transparency is added as the third dimension to Dalh’s polyarchy graph,  the possibility a relationship between competitiveness and inclusiveness arises within a 3 dimensional space.  This possibility becomes reality in the graph z=x^3 + y^3.

3D Graph of Polyarchy (democracy)
3D Graph of Polyarchy (democracy)

In this graph, a positively transparent society is placed into the top left area of  polyarchy while a negatively transparent society (one in which information is used to create false realities) brings you towards the bottom right area of authoritarianism.  A society that is inclusive but not competitive has a negative transparency because a lot of people are supporting a poor selection of leaders so false realities is constructed to help people view this situation as acceptable.  A society that is competitive but not inclusive is highly transparent because each included individual receives an unusually high return on their vote.   In the real world, a highly inclusive but minimally competitive government like the Soviet Union had a vast propaganda machine while the highly competitive but relatively non-inclusive post-revolution America had a thriving, decentralized information distribution businesses.

The next step is clear: we need to solve for transparency.  Given two variables we could, theoretically, plot societies on the x^3+Y^3 plane and even watch as they move across it over time.  The implications for this would be tremendous.  Imagine if America adopted a foreign policy of transparency whose only mission was to facilitate the creation of transparent national governments.  I think this is precisely the type of metric we need to create a global coalition of friendly, democratic and free nations.