12th February 2020, 3:36 PM
Environment: Take direct control of major polluting entities or we all die. Those are literally our only choices.
Economy: Democratic socialism. We tried capitalism. It didn't work. We tried state run communism, it didn't work either. We can try bottom-up socialism instead. Instead of a commisar in every board room, put the power in the employees. Every company will go back to stake holding instead of share holding, meaning all the investing is done by the employees themselves. The stock market will be burned to the ground and urinated on then fed to pigs who will be fed to other pigs and those pigs will be shot into space! Every company, now majority-owned by it's own employees, will need to be fully open with said employees about all their plans. This is the end-game of unions, their final form.
Voting rights: Voting should be far easier. Any elitist attempt to put down a bar on this is only to help the elites maintain their power. That's all it ever was for, all it ever will be for. The current voting system is also corrupt, right down to the party level.
Ban all PACs (this will take an amendment), ban individual spending on political ads. Instead provide a capped per-candidate federal budget for campaign spending that equalizes the playing field. Regulate the parties. They've been private clubs long enough. They need to be publically accountable. Banish the caucus and eliminate weird districting rules. If it's a national vote, a straight national count is all that should matter. If it's a state vote, a striaght state vote is all that should matter. Give individual regions the power to define their own district lines. This will do a lot to restrict the possibility of gerrymandering. Change the voting system to scored.
Abortion: My thoughts are nuanced on this, but in general in the first couple terms there's not even a moral decision to be made. It's a mass of unthinking cells. Potential is irrelevant, because if it was relevant we'd all be morally required to provide as many cells as we could get away with to turn into clones. Beyond that, it becomes morally grey, but I will say this. As a general rule, in those grey situations, I'm not qualified to make a decision for you. It's YOUR personal decision. Well, considering where I am... it's a woman's decision. A woman and her doctor. So then, what beyond that? We need better funding for orphaneges and foster care. Being able to give someone up for adoption should be far more viable than it is.
Immigration: I believe in a path to citizenship. No, it's not good that someone is an illegal citizen, but the way people react to it is awful. Kick them out, imprison them, steal their children? No. Provide a way for them to BECOME citizens, and make it easy! The US makes it far too hard. What we need is an Ellis Island for the southern border. No, not an "open border", people still need to get in but if they pass a basic check for contageous disease and an understanding of US rules and customs, that's something that should be doable in maybe a couple weeks, THAT DAY if they've studied in advance. From there, give them a card- let them in and point the way to one of several places open to providing aid to those trying to start a new life.
Gay Marriage: This goes under the "duh" category. Being the gay is fine. It's not hurting anybody. That's really all you need.
Death Penalty: Against it as a matter of principal. Of course I could mention if a police officer is being shot at they have a right to defend themselves with lethal force, but frankly the death penalty isn't about that, it's about what to do with the murderer once they're caught. Considering there are people who have actively suggested drug dealers should be killed, well, yea I certainly disagree with that. I'm an atheist though, I don't believe in life after death so that colors my view. Of course I reject the death penalty.
Religion: Atheist that could be convinced with evidence, but in the event there was a god- it would have a lot of explaining to do. Meaning I'm not about to start worshipping it, whatever it is. In any event, politically everyone has a right to believe in a god, but NOT a right to act on it, and while I won't debate religion ordinarily, if you are using religion to justify a policy or a scientifically testable belief, I WILL call you out on it. Religious freedom does not trump systemic prejudice and it's effects.
Affirmative Action: A necessary course correction. You don't straighten the wheel to get back on the road, you turn the opposite way for a while until you're going the right way. Only when social equality is reached can we actually do away with affirmative action, and we aren't even close to there yet. See: Unite the Right rally
Health Care: Basic human right, full stop. Anything else is a useless compromise.
Education: Education needs a major overhaul. It's progressed quite a bit, but teachers need more than funding. They need repeated training programs to familiarize themselves with modern teaching technology and modern knowledge. These must be fully funded. School years need to be extended as other countries do, and college should simply be something everyone takes part in after high school. I am self-taught, but I don't wish that on anyone. College should be as free as every other grade level. As for teaching strategy, that evolves with the times and we need a board of the best and brightest minds in modern knowledge on teaching to make sure our methods match the science.
Foreign Policy: We don't jump into armed conflict unless it literally threatens to directly attack us, and we ALWAYS declare a goal along with a declaration of war, so that the ware can actually end. Beyond that, we provide aid not in the form of finances but in directly offering to build things. This is how we used to do things over 70 years ago, and it was working until we decided to substitute directly building hospitals and schools for just dumping a wad of cash on the country. We know how that ended up. They take that money and buy weapons FROM us to eventually use AGAINST us.
Gun control: Australia's model has a proven track record, and I think a version of that in the US would be very effective. People are allowed to have guns, but every individual gun needs it's own approval and a stated reason. None of those reasons can be "self defense", however one of those reasoms can be "I'm in the militia". The militias across the country will become well-regulated, both at a state and national level. No oddball nuts that think militias are there to rise up against the government. It'll essentially end up treated like a branch of the military with more bottom-up self ownership. This is really the only difference I'd have with Australia's model.
Economy: Democratic socialism. We tried capitalism. It didn't work. We tried state run communism, it didn't work either. We can try bottom-up socialism instead. Instead of a commisar in every board room, put the power in the employees. Every company will go back to stake holding instead of share holding, meaning all the investing is done by the employees themselves. The stock market will be burned to the ground and urinated on then fed to pigs who will be fed to other pigs and those pigs will be shot into space! Every company, now majority-owned by it's own employees, will need to be fully open with said employees about all their plans. This is the end-game of unions, their final form.
Voting rights: Voting should be far easier. Any elitist attempt to put down a bar on this is only to help the elites maintain their power. That's all it ever was for, all it ever will be for. The current voting system is also corrupt, right down to the party level.
Ban all PACs (this will take an amendment), ban individual spending on political ads. Instead provide a capped per-candidate federal budget for campaign spending that equalizes the playing field. Regulate the parties. They've been private clubs long enough. They need to be publically accountable. Banish the caucus and eliminate weird districting rules. If it's a national vote, a straight national count is all that should matter. If it's a state vote, a striaght state vote is all that should matter. Give individual regions the power to define their own district lines. This will do a lot to restrict the possibility of gerrymandering. Change the voting system to scored.
Abortion: My thoughts are nuanced on this, but in general in the first couple terms there's not even a moral decision to be made. It's a mass of unthinking cells. Potential is irrelevant, because if it was relevant we'd all be morally required to provide as many cells as we could get away with to turn into clones. Beyond that, it becomes morally grey, but I will say this. As a general rule, in those grey situations, I'm not qualified to make a decision for you. It's YOUR personal decision. Well, considering where I am... it's a woman's decision. A woman and her doctor. So then, what beyond that? We need better funding for orphaneges and foster care. Being able to give someone up for adoption should be far more viable than it is.
Immigration: I believe in a path to citizenship. No, it's not good that someone is an illegal citizen, but the way people react to it is awful. Kick them out, imprison them, steal their children? No. Provide a way for them to BECOME citizens, and make it easy! The US makes it far too hard. What we need is an Ellis Island for the southern border. No, not an "open border", people still need to get in but if they pass a basic check for contageous disease and an understanding of US rules and customs, that's something that should be doable in maybe a couple weeks, THAT DAY if they've studied in advance. From there, give them a card- let them in and point the way to one of several places open to providing aid to those trying to start a new life.
Gay Marriage: This goes under the "duh" category. Being the gay is fine. It's not hurting anybody. That's really all you need.
Death Penalty: Against it as a matter of principal. Of course I could mention if a police officer is being shot at they have a right to defend themselves with lethal force, but frankly the death penalty isn't about that, it's about what to do with the murderer once they're caught. Considering there are people who have actively suggested drug dealers should be killed, well, yea I certainly disagree with that. I'm an atheist though, I don't believe in life after death so that colors my view. Of course I reject the death penalty.
Religion: Atheist that could be convinced with evidence, but in the event there was a god- it would have a lot of explaining to do. Meaning I'm not about to start worshipping it, whatever it is. In any event, politically everyone has a right to believe in a god, but NOT a right to act on it, and while I won't debate religion ordinarily, if you are using religion to justify a policy or a scientifically testable belief, I WILL call you out on it. Religious freedom does not trump systemic prejudice and it's effects.
Affirmative Action: A necessary course correction. You don't straighten the wheel to get back on the road, you turn the opposite way for a while until you're going the right way. Only when social equality is reached can we actually do away with affirmative action, and we aren't even close to there yet. See: Unite the Right rally
Health Care: Basic human right, full stop. Anything else is a useless compromise.
Education: Education needs a major overhaul. It's progressed quite a bit, but teachers need more than funding. They need repeated training programs to familiarize themselves with modern teaching technology and modern knowledge. These must be fully funded. School years need to be extended as other countries do, and college should simply be something everyone takes part in after high school. I am self-taught, but I don't wish that on anyone. College should be as free as every other grade level. As for teaching strategy, that evolves with the times and we need a board of the best and brightest minds in modern knowledge on teaching to make sure our methods match the science.
Foreign Policy: We don't jump into armed conflict unless it literally threatens to directly attack us, and we ALWAYS declare a goal along with a declaration of war, so that the ware can actually end. Beyond that, we provide aid not in the form of finances but in directly offering to build things. This is how we used to do things over 70 years ago, and it was working until we decided to substitute directly building hospitals and schools for just dumping a wad of cash on the country. We know how that ended up. They take that money and buy weapons FROM us to eventually use AGAINST us.
Gun control: Australia's model has a proven track record, and I think a version of that in the US would be very effective. People are allowed to have guns, but every individual gun needs it's own approval and a stated reason. None of those reasons can be "self defense", however one of those reasoms can be "I'm in the militia". The militias across the country will become well-regulated, both at a state and national level. No oddball nuts that think militias are there to rise up against the government. It'll essentially end up treated like a branch of the military with more bottom-up self ownership. This is really the only difference I'd have with Australia's model.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)