![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conulyFirst, sign the petition and spam it around, would you? I know it's silly and futile, but it's also super-low-effort. Somewhere in the multiverse, hypocrisy doesn't pay.
Second, at the very least we've got people talking about it. Unfortunately, at least half of what people are saying is inane and ill-informed.
1. "You're just trying to change the way the electoral college works because you don't like the results!"
Well, yes, when it comes to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact I suppose I am... but I was on the anti-electoral-college case for a while. It's got little to do with this particular issue.
However, if by "change the way it works" you mean these petitions - listen, if the electoral college was intended to be a rubber stamp, we wouldn't bother having electors. We'd just do the math, the same way CNN does the math today. This is literally the way it works. Just because we've effectively house ruled that it isn't doesn't mean we can't decide to play by the book. (And why are you so scared? You and I both agree this won't work, so what are you getting worked up about? I know what I'm getting worked up about, but how about you?)
1a. "The system works the way it is intended to work. If the electors voted independently, that would be awful!"
This is not the way the system was intended to work.
2. "But if we didn't do this weird thing, democracy would collapse."
Nobody else does this weird thing.
2a. "Well, because of our large country and states - I mean, do we want the five biggest cities choosing what the rest of the country does!?"
I've done the math. Even if the five largest cities in this nation voted in lockstep, there still aren't enough people to collectively decide the election.
3. "Something something something founders wanted to protect states' rights."
If your argument predates the Civil War, and revolves around states' rights, then a little history for you: that's a codeword for slavery.
Which is good, because otherwise it's just bizarre. Who today thinks of themselves as a citizen of a state instead of the USA? It's arbitrary lines on a map. What a strange way to divide up the populace! We might as well divide people into electoral districts based on job, or race, or level of education.
4. "Our Founding Fathers wisely wanted to prevent demagogues from taking power."
Okay, yeah, I've used that argument myself and pulled up the relevant quote from the Federalist Papers, but let's not kid ourselves here. Our Founding Fathers wanted to prevent the masses from voting in somebody who would make rules the elite didn't like. Now, I'm not going to say the rule they cared about was slavery, I'm sure there were many property rights they didn't want taken away from them, but... yeah.
5. "Well, we're not a democracy, we're a republic."
Technically true. That's not at all connected to the electoral college. That has to do with our legislative branch. We are a republic because we have Congress - not because our system for picking the president is unique in the world.
6. "Well, we can't just throw out something the Founding Fathers came up with!"
We already did when we started directly electing Senators.
I'm convinced. We don't need more STEM in America, we need more civics and history.
Second, at the very least we've got people talking about it. Unfortunately, at least half of what people are saying is inane and ill-informed.
1. "You're just trying to change the way the electoral college works because you don't like the results!"
Well, yes, when it comes to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact I suppose I am... but I was on the anti-electoral-college case for a while. It's got little to do with this particular issue.
However, if by "change the way it works" you mean these petitions - listen, if the electoral college was intended to be a rubber stamp, we wouldn't bother having electors. We'd just do the math, the same way CNN does the math today. This is literally the way it works. Just because we've effectively house ruled that it isn't doesn't mean we can't decide to play by the book. (And why are you so scared? You and I both agree this won't work, so what are you getting worked up about? I know what I'm getting worked up about, but how about you?)
1a. "The system works the way it is intended to work. If the electors voted independently, that would be awful!"
This is not the way the system was intended to work.
2. "But if we didn't do this weird thing, democracy would collapse."
Nobody else does this weird thing.
2a. "Well, because of our large country and states - I mean, do we want the five biggest cities choosing what the rest of the country does!?"
I've done the math. Even if the five largest cities in this nation voted in lockstep, there still aren't enough people to collectively decide the election.
3. "Something something something founders wanted to protect states' rights."
If your argument predates the Civil War, and revolves around states' rights, then a little history for you: that's a codeword for slavery.
Which is good, because otherwise it's just bizarre. Who today thinks of themselves as a citizen of a state instead of the USA? It's arbitrary lines on a map. What a strange way to divide up the populace! We might as well divide people into electoral districts based on job, or race, or level of education.
4. "Our Founding Fathers wisely wanted to prevent demagogues from taking power."
Okay, yeah, I've used that argument myself and pulled up the relevant quote from the Federalist Papers, but let's not kid ourselves here. Our Founding Fathers wanted to prevent the masses from voting in somebody who would make rules the elite didn't like. Now, I'm not going to say the rule they cared about was slavery, I'm sure there were many property rights they didn't want taken away from them, but... yeah.
5. "Well, we're not a democracy, we're a republic."
Technically true. That's not at all connected to the electoral college. That has to do with our legislative branch. We are a republic because we have Congress - not because our system for picking the president is unique in the world.
6. "Well, we can't just throw out something the Founding Fathers came up with!"
We already did when we started directly electing Senators.
I'm convinced. We don't need more STEM in America, we need more civics and history.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2016-11-19 10:23 pm (UTC)I'm convinced this is what happens when you leave education up to mass, industrialized (Taylorized) schooling. There can be no amount of civics or history taught in our schools adequate to counter the effect of 13 years working in what is structurally a normalized, justified totalitarian autocracy.
Our system of raising our children did this. Miller was right: it's about how you raise the children.
no subject
Date: 2016-11-20 01:39 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-11-20 07:48 am (UTC)Half of Texas, from what I hear. I suspect this is one of those weird divides exacerbated by hanging out with people like ourselves, and we tripped over the same thing here with Brexit - many young liberals see countries as arbitrary lines on a map, and see themselves as European, but there are many other people outside our bubble who see low-key nationalism as totally rational.
no subject
Date: 2016-11-20 06:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-11-19 08:47 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-11-20 01:35 am (UTC)