A small observation: you know when we had more political compromise? When we had less (de facto) transparency.
Agreements bargained out in a dark room, with everyone announcing the compromise and expressing support for what's agreed, are how American politics worked best.
Radical transparency poisons compromise. By which I mean, non-comprehensive but absolute transparency: everyone knows details, but no one understands the greater picture.
In a largely uneducated democratic electorate (relative to our elected officials, their staffs, and professionals, and leveled as a non-partisan charge against all parties and independents), why do we try to completely usurp our elected representatives' ability to bargain on our behalf?
We, as voters, should judge our politicians on what they do, not what they reject.
The former results in functional compromises we're not thrilled with. The latter results in ideologically pure paralysis.
A small observation: you know when we had more political compromise? When we had less (de facto) transparency.
Agreements bargained out in a dark room, with everyone announcing the compromise and expressing support for what's agreed, are how American politics worked best.
Radical transparency poisons compromise. By which I mean, non-comprehensive but absolute transparency: everyone knows details, but no one understands the greater picture.
In a largely uneducated democratic electorate (relative to our elected officials, their staffs, and professionals, and leveled as a non-partisan charge against all parties and independents), why do we try to completely usurp our elected representatives' ability to bargain on our behalf?
We, as voters, should judge our politicians on what they do, not what they reject.
The former results in functional compromises we're not thrilled with. The latter results in ideologically pure paralysis.
More depth: https://president.upenn.edu/meet-president/Mindsets-Politica...