• Earlier this month, Solomon Kleinsmith profiled the new organization No Labels in a post at Rise of the Center. Solomon writes:
You may have noticed that there has been a spate of articles about a new political organization that will be launching in December, called No Labels. I’ve actually known about this for a couple months now, as I ran into one of their organizers on Twitter not too long after I launched this blog. I’ve had the pleasure of speaking with a few of their staff members, and they really do have their heads in the right place.
They haven’t been pushing themselves out to the media yet, waiting for the election cycle to play itself out, but have been doing some quiet, mostly word of mouth, preparations around getting people to their launch (which I will be going to) in New York on December 13th. Along with the Conference of Independents that IndependentVoting.org is putting on in February, this is THE event to be at for moderates and centrist independents that I am aware of in the next year plus.• In a lengthy article at Zero Party Politics, Gus Bridi sketches a plan for "implementing a zero party system of government in the United States." Gus writes:
In an earlier article, The Case for a Zero Party System , I dared you to imagine a non-partisan system of government which became the namesake of this blog—Zero Party Politics. An old idea lying dormant for more than two centuries which was George Washington’s vision of a newly formed America. I asked you to imagine the possibility—the “why.” This article will focus on the practicalities—on the “how.”. . . .• At Politics in the Zeros, Bob Morris begins a discussion of voting reform with a post on score voting and approval voting:
Under the model I propose, political parties would be free to exist, but they would be restricted from participating as an unofficial branch of government (which is really what the Republicans and Democrats have morphed into). As the NRA, ACLU, NOW, AFLCIO, AIPAC and a seemingly infinite array of other organizations and special interest groups who are advancing political agendas exist without being intrinsically linked to government, so can political parties.
Our two-party duopoly is supported and kept in power by a plurality voting system that makes it difficult for third parties to break through. But it doesn’t have to be that way. There are other, far more equitable voting methods. Among them are score voting and approval voting. I plan to explore these methods deeper in future posts, but for now, here’s some useful links. If you have thoughts and ideas on this, please, jump into the discussion.• Finally, last week at The Think 3 Institute, Sam Wilson considered his local alternative weekly paper's attempt to broaden the discussion revolving around New York's gubernatorial race, but found they fell short by focusing on the Green and giving the Libertarian short shrift, in a post examining the relationship between third parties and independent media. Interestingly, his conclusion is the premise of the above-mentioned post at Zero Party Politics:
I appreciate that Metroland represents progressive opinion and is usually open to libertarian opinion on cultural issues only, but if there is a necessary debate that Democrats and Republicans aren't offering us, it has to include the full range of conscientious opinion, whether it has hitherto been pigeonholed as "right," "left" or other. I say this as a New Yorker who will most likely vote for Hawkins next month. I agree with the candidate that "having a third significant party in American politics is necessary," but I wouldn't stop there. I'd like to see a fourth, a fifth, and however many more are necessary to represent fully all the reasonable options open to the country. I still believe that a no-party system is the ideal . . .Have you recently come across an article of note in the third party and independent blogosphere? Or perhaps you've written one yourself? Drop a link in the comments.
No comments:
Post a Comment