Political Change – I feel #disconnected. Are we ready to endorse #nuclear instability to change a #democratic #process. Can we learn from #Brexit? Please give me your views

I am an agent for change. I thought I understood the need for change. I spent the first half of my adult life being buffeted around fortune 100 company toxic change. I then took control of change, and tried desperately to understand people needs within that toxic change cycle to try to break the vast injury that institutional change places on individuals.

I was talking to my wife about the debate last night, I am a liberal and consider myself someone who in the whole moderates my allegiance with Democrats as they are closer to helping less fortunate people of any kind, gender and race, society and countries.

What continues to shock me, is that on the whole, there is a cross section of educated and well read US citizens who are ready to vote for a racist, sexist, narcissistic  bigot who could easily launch a nuclear weapon with no real regard to its consequence.

The disconnect lies in the wildly disproportionate degrees as to the two things these have to offer. I have helped hundreds if not thousands of people stare down the barrels of inevitability of change. Where is the moderator in this disastrous situation? Voting for a monster doesn’t guarantee positive change. In fact, if you look at Brexit, a whole nation woke up stunned it had happened. “We only wanted to shake things up”, my country for the most part is still in shock. But I live in the US now, and I love it, I love its energy and can do attitude.

Were are the use cases for political reform?  What can we do to show its ok to have an established well respected career politician, while we do something about changing the stagnation of a political system? A system that allows for mediocrity to thrive and individuals to win over the common voice.

What can we learn from history, the many many cases where this kind of social experiment went wrong. Where people want to hit the big read easy button.

I am lost and I know many other people who are also lost, daily trying to fill in these blanks in there own minds.

I’m looking for what I am missing I’m not tasking a political statement, I really want to hear your views.



2 thoughts on “Political Change – I feel #disconnected. Are we ready to endorse #nuclear instability to change a #democratic #process. Can we learn from #Brexit? Please give me your views”

  1. The contest between politicians should be one of reason; that is, issues that affect our everyday life. Then there’s the “motivation” factor: where our leaders inspire us through their intensity, persistence and direction. In cultural anthropology, there is the concept of a ‘Big Man’ in tribal societies. This person maintains their position through the ability to persuade or some prevailing wisdom. To the individuals who follow Donald Trump, they are either persuaded (because – for a certain constituency of his – they are inherently in agreement with the irrational) or agree with his ‘wisdom’ (the rational portions of his argument).

    When compounding the lack of reason to the behavior of individuals (or groups of individuals), I think of the ‘Big Man:’ this individual moderates groupthink by appealing to either reason or lunacy. And sometimes the scales are skewed in favor of lunacy while pulling in the more reasonable, educated, well read individuals because they agree wholeheartedly with the reasonable arguments and take the irrational as hyperbole.

    The case for political reform are there. They are reasonable but the obstacles are primarily the self-interests of special interest groups, internal and external bureaucracy and – often – sheer laziness of politicians and government officials. This is what people are being fed up with. For example, the idea of popular health care should appeal to all. After all, Congress receives the best health care any human being can ask for. So why can’t this program extend to everyone? The execution of the current program has been such where premiums are increasing while coverage shrinks. This is the opposite result of what was promised. What happened to the reasonable outcomes driven by economies of scale? This is how reasonable political agendas and the expected use case fails.

    In the end, we need better (ethically and morally) people who are skilled, experienced and possess the ability to motivate for the good of the people. Trump has the intensity to drive a country off a cliff with people waving their flags. Hillary has the persistence to drive her personal agenda while failing miserably (by being bureaucratic and opaque). Yet neither have provided a case that offers this country a unified direction of where WE should be going as a nation.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks Allen, all great points, I wish there was more transparency and focus on how we can reform the political system. This is surely where the intensity should be. If you have a house and and a senate that is constantly able to stop a democratically elected government from progressing radical reform you will create mediocracy. Things will stagnate. If the voting system is not able to represent the countries desires and deliver a platform for which change can be effected, then the platform needs to be changed. Or no one can ever really progress?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.