A MANUAL FOR CHANGE – PART II

It would almost appear that Americans have finally become sufficiently fed-up with our pseudo-democracy to usher in a new wave of inevitable reform, based on the information that I’m receiving of late.  I would like to believe this is true; but I was born close enough to Missouri to have a bit of the “show me” attitude in my genes.
 
Ignorance and apathy have no role on the path to freedom and democracy.  I hope I am understood that I am using these characteristics non-pejoratively, as I simply cannot put myself in everyone’s “moccasins” nor in everyone’s “classroom” of life.  There are many valid reasons that people do not understand the significance of political and economical action on their lives and their descendants.
 
Perhaps if the appropriate person can be found, a “savior” if you wish, enough people will become interested in taking action to select national leaders who not only will take us in the right direction; but will also garner the respect of the rest of the world.
 
To that end, I will attempt to initiate a discussion to outline 1) characteristics and traits we may want to see in our leaders and 2) the process by which that person would come to lead our country:
 
Characteristics:
Humble:  This does not equate with “weakness” in any form; but indicates a lack of arrogance or false pride.  None of us know everything and accepting advice from those knowledgeable in specific areas is a sign of strength.  Being “ego-less” is a great strength.  In the words of Oscar Wilde, “Ambition is the final step toward failure.”

Rational:  This relates to using intellectually sound judgment and good sense.  For example, when relating to people of different cultures, a rational person understands those differences sufficiently to engender mutual respect in communicating with each other.

Ethical: Probably many people believe that “ethics” and “religion” are synonymous; but they are not.  In fact, a “religious” person could be completely unethical.

Wise:  A wise person has the ability to discern and judge properly as to what is true, right and prudent.

No religious affiliation: I bring your attention to the “Related Other” links on the right side of this site, particularly to “The End of Faith: Religion, Terror and the Future of Reason,” a book by Sam Harris.  One site missing relates to the book “American Theocracy” by Kevin Philips, because I haven’t read it, yet.  I did, however, listen to an interview with him and was thoroughly impressed.  He goes back quite a way in Washington politics and has a fantastic memory.  You can guess from the title of the book what the main subject will be.  Now we can add Theocracy to Corporatocracy and Nerocracy. George W. Bush is an excellent example of someone using religion to his/her best advantage and, thus, is an example of a theocratic leader. (By the way, a recent news magazine points out that the conventional wisdom in Washington, D.C. and elsewhere is that “President Cheney” runs the country.  He and his cohorts are advocates of Corporatocracy and the “New World Power” and they will do anything, legal or not, to assure its continuation.  They have decided to “Let Bush be Bush,” which is the reason for his more frequent blundering.)

Sam Harris makes a very convincing case for the hypothesis that religion is the cause of evil, terrorism, etc.  Behind every religion is some form of “god” and a “holy book” that supposedly lays out the way its followers should live.  Some people who have read and studied these books realize that they represent the works of people who had to make up a god with human characteristics, as has every culture in the world.
 
A fundamentalist christian would have to be able to drink poison and not die, just as a fundamentalist muslim jihadist must, according to the word of god, kill any infidel who defiles god’s holy land or people.  Jews also must believe that certain land and rights are inherently theirs by the “word of god.”  And so it goes….    “god bless America” or “allah be praised” are meaningless.
 
So, another characteristic of our “perfect” candidate is that s/he be an atheist.  (I would accept “Theo-Atheist” since there is a God, just not the ones that we have made up.  I would also accept someone who participates in a religion; but is wise enough to put that aside and use reason, ethics and wisdom in leading our country.)
 
Independence from all “special interest groups:”  This is obvious.  Accepting bribes means that the person has no reason, ethics or wisdom, only greed, and we’ve had enough of that.

Process for selection of our leader and national representative to the world:
Previously, I brought to your attention to the link on the right side under “Links: Democracy” to “Cleaner Congress,” which notes how we can elect national leaders who have no debts owing to “special interest” groups.  A recent link added, “Democracy Land” refers to http://www.unity08.com, which proposes an interesting electoral approach, contrary to that which continues to promote the same methodology, which keeps us in deep doo-doo, as it were, at every election.
 
Perhaps we could combine this idea with something creative like having the finalists for the presidential election be chosen initially through a “draft” mechanism, similar to what was used before we had a “voluntary” military service, or through a process similar to the jury service selection currently in use.  Names are selected randomly and people are eliminated through a series of screenings until only a few, the best of the best, as it were, remain to be presented to the country as candidates.
 
We could call it “Survivor: Presidency 2008,”  “American President” or “Last President Standing.”   🙂
 
 
Anyway, this is just to get the thought process moving and I invite all comments and suggestions.  We may survive under our present system; but the chances are slim and the price we pay is too high.
Thank you,
Joe