Open Planning Conference (Actions Have Consequences)
Bernie decided to run on the Democratic Ticket, Bernie decided to speak truth to power. We can see the consequences of his actions. At various times we all (each of us as individuals) have initiated actions, and those actions have effected (in large or small ways) people we know and for whom we care.
To assist in the larger effort I think we as a group (c99%) should adopt some specific action item(s) to promote during the next few months. I think this would unambiguously generate a positive message that won't be ignored or legitimately faulted.
The following is distilled from the previous sheet of the session. If you have an issue with my transcription, please comment below.
It is now time to pick a theme and hammer out some details.
EDIT: For ease of referencing ONLY I have converted this into an ordered list.
- Down ballot candidates and issues
- listening to Bernie for my next move
- 3rd party,write-in,whatever, just show you contempt for the top 2 and vote
- Ask Bernie not to share our names (donor list)
- leave right after the convention
- creation of a viable online party
- Every week until the convention, have one action or a repeat of a previous action
- Vote Green: Jill Stein
- form a new party ready to run a candidate in 2020
- vote in election don't leave it blank
- limit the influence of lobbyists within the DNC
- kill off the Electoral College
- #no vote for superdelegate X (if they currently hold office)
- limit the influence of corporations and corporate donations to Democratic candidates
- reform the rules so that superdelegates, if they exist at all, are bound by the expressed will of their states’ voters
- reboot on our so-called democracy
- changing the political system
- Bernie's agenda
- Divest from the Democratic Party
- Form a new Party
- reform rules so that there is consistency among states
- get a goal or two- a few short term and a few long term, create a plan, and most importantly FIGHT!!!!!
- One short term goal is Brand New Congress, which is already in action for this year's election.
- Getting rid of all e-voting machines should be a major focus
Comments
I would add
Getting rid of all e-voting machines should be a major focus.
"You can't just leave those who created the problem in charge of the solution."---Tyree Scott
Not listed do to the vagaries of discussion format.
Information to counter the disinformation and lack
of information: Continue Thom Hartmann's Brunch with Bernie to a wider audience somehow?
When wealth rules, democracy dies.
I am thinking TYT
I agree with including TYT.
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
Bernie's agenda is my framework
But we need both structural and a momentum movement components.
c99% cane become part of the structural (gaining supporters and alliances) movement and it can be where the momentum activities are featured for action.
Just thinking aloud.
The political revolution continues
"Just Thinking Aloud" is what this forum is about.
Bring Back Exit polling
Very important to verify fraud/hacking. Cali Dems got rid of this essential tool and look what happened ... Hill did 16% better against Bern in primary than polls predicted. They were neck-and-neck before primary, but she ended up winning.
Institutionalized Exit Polling?
Perhaps, a coordinated systemic approach nationwide might prove (as in test) the validity of our voting system. I could see "third party" support for this concept.
"third party" meaning third parties: Political, Media Outlets (MMS, Internet sites like TYT, et cetera), and various polling companies.
This is something we could even crowdfund.
Anyone who had $27 to throw to Bernie should be willing to invest that much in an exit polling system. I know there are already organizations out there that work towards election fairness, so maybe we could work with them.
But getting accurate exit polls from here on out - NOT done by the media companies that then change their data to match the announced totals - is hugely important in making the case for paper ballots.
ETA: I also ran across this - which is interesting:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/adamkalebernest/follow-my-votes-parallel-presidential-election-exp
I think I'd still prefer paper ballots for national/state elections, but maybe it does have some applicability for voting on referendums, etc. Even though they say it's secure and you can follow your vote, I'm still not willing to trust technology when there are more secure methods available.
My vote goes to 22.
Thank you PriceRip for standing up and fighting instead of throwing in the towel. Sorry, you can't herd cats without someone being in charge.
My background is in marketing, sales and client project management. I was trained on UNIX in the late 70's, haven't written any code since then. You decide if I can help us reach the goal. What is the goal by the way?
Make a plan and work the plan. Don't take on more than 1 short term tactical option (for such a small group) that supports your goal or mission. Have at least two more tactical options ready, with time lines. Use a tool like Project Management off the shelf from an open source software to establish tasks and timelines. (this is easy, if you need help let me know). There is also tracking the metrics of success, lots of options.
I'm always in a hurry to get to the action items. It takes discipline to think through a 5 year plan (long term). It can be done in a 4 hr session. It should include a strategy meeting of no more than 10 people, face to face. (note: there is no privacy on the net) The group leader should choose the represents for this site, anyone interested should volunteer to be added to the list.
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
Exactly the point!
As soon as these Cats settle on a discussion of the most attractive "pressure point" and have sketched an action plan, Project Management (a skill I do not possess) will become paramount.
I teach (particularly classes involving upperclassmen) by guiding students to discover their abilities to be effective. I have never been good at telling others how to accomplish anything more than the most basic of tasks.
My votes
I put this up here cause we got way off track down below.
Good: 1, 2, 5, 8, 18, 22, 24
Good but difficult, how we gonna have impact?: 11, 12, 14, 15
Bad: 3, 6, 9, 20
Ugly. Well, no, just indifferent / maybe / not sure / don’t understand: 4, 7, 13, 10, 16, 17, 19, 21, 23
Thanks for taking this on, PR
(No subject)
Look up at the stars and not down at your feet. Try to make sense of what you see, and wonder about what makes the universe exist. Be curious. Stephen Hawking
Organizing and moving forward
Organizing and moving forward it critical at this point. We need to plan for the general election and beyond. There are a lot of good ideas listed above. Maybe an online poll to vote for the top 10?
Being Effective
I see the possibility of us (c99%) picking a well defined action plan, to push for a well defined goal, getting the word out via various channels including the like of TYT, and actually influencing the behavior of a targeted audience.
This may be pie in the sky, after all this site is overrun by cats (read type "A" personalities).
worth the effort
Yea, we all cats, but might as well try to put our energies to good use.
Organizing and moving forward
Organizing and moving forward it critical at this point. We need to plan for the general election and beyond. There are a lot of good ideas listed above. Maybe an online poll to vote for the top 10?
Synergetic process in this environment?
In real life the discussion generally reaches a crescendo as synergy takes hold and synthesis "spontaneously" occurs as the group reaches a consensus. It's a quantum mechanical, density of states, sort of thing. It's a bit difficult to explain using words but tracking through the Feynman Diagram is a beautiful thing to behold. Ah, but I digress: I do not know how to emulate the real world in this artificial "matrix"—like environment.
Ummm, PR, I think you're overdoing
the "physics" analogies here!
Let's not "cat, live or dead" state superposition principle complexify matters.
Surely you're not intimating that one's vote in an electronic voting booth (but perhaps you are, in which case my favouritism for pencilled ballots marked with an X, hand counted, and invigilated is the way to go, no matter how long it might take) will end up as a pseudo-random "count" in a kicksorter (you may be too young to remember those).
BY the way, your sigline was mine back at TOP (you can look it up). I had attributed it to Wiliam Bloom, in his Closing of the American Mind.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
I was born in 1948.
And I in 1945.
Perhaps you might wish to elucidate?
You're not the only physicist with a PhD here, you know.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Sure but most just get pissed off:
This is an "outline" and the actual presentation is rather more of a discussion.
It all starts with the fact that everything that happens is mediated by fundamental forces (elecromagnetic, weak, strong) (forget gravity and its minions for the moment). That is, the stuff we call thinking originates in electrochemical processes that are inherently quantum mechanical.
That means you are not responsible for spontaneous thoughts and spontaneous urges. The measure of maturity (acquired as you grow to ≈ 18 years of age) is the development of your brain "management" centers. They exist as a consequence of millions of years of evolution.
This is the point that most loose it and start down voting (flagging) me and it all ends so very badly. On line "communication" lacks enough bandwidth to carry high fidelity. Actually, this is all rather a trivial application of some very basic physics. If presented in real life with in-person people with which to interact, a rather lively and interesting conversation ensues. I plan to do a series at the OLLI center in Medford Oregon after I settle in.
But let's not pursue the matter. As it is too silly.
silly
is sublime.
Sorry, Dr. R I Price, but you've just lost me.
You what?
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
The "you" is the problem?
Not if by "you" you meant to say "one".
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
And so it goes . . .
The lanquage gets stilted as one quibbles with another about the tense (but then not being tense, one laughs or is that you laugh or me laughs) of some random word and we spiral down the rabbit whole as it swallows the discussion hole. An nary a thought is given to the intent or intention of the original speaker (Oh shit) the original writer (Oh double shit) the original typist oH fuck keyboardist.
Frankly, I've no idea what you're talking about,
Mais je te laisse le dernier mot, Monsieur.
Bonsoir.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
I actually understand now a brain works.
Is that meant to be a reply?
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Yep
Why do you think I am over doing the physics analogy?
Frankly, I've not the foggiest why.
But I'll not pursue the matter.
Good evening.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Do you now? Really?
I look forward to hearing about your forthcoming Nobel in Medicine and Physiology.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
What the fuck is going on here?
A pissing contest?
Mundus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur.
That's a good question.
Professor PriceRIP is being rather obtuse tonight. I'm trying to understand what he's trying to say, and his replies are rather obfuscatory.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
This is soooo far off topic
But I suspect the original intent of the article is of little interest to this community as a whole.
Your original point was quite useful.
I then added a few of my own.
I've no idea how we got so far off topic. If it was my fault for an inadvertent irrelevancy (which I'm rather prone to, from time to time), then I apologise.
Let's call it a night.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
No apology needed
I am wired to make connections that are unusual, that's my gift (and my curse) <- (that is a not so subtle reference to Monk) but I feel I must explain lest I be misinterpreted, but then there is no way that I will not be misinterpreted, sigh!
My comment (that was at the edge of this rabbit hole) was an observation that the route to consensus involves processes that are opaque (as in not describable) to (by) a "classical" (as in pre-21st century) analysis.
But that is probably beyond interest because the proximate cause of concern is that there may be no way to proceed to (nor any reason to advance toward) a consensus in the matter of this article.
Actually, believe it or not,
I think (ref. Monk) that I'm closer to an understanding of your POV.
I'm thinking simplistically right now, so I shan't insult you with a trivial comment.
But could you explain what you mean by a "classical (pre-21 C)" analysis? A psychological analysis? Political-science analysis? Economic analysis?
I have little/no background in the social sciences (I'm theoretical nuclear physics) so I should most certainly appreciate a reference or two.
Thanks!
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Experimental Nuclear Physics
I started reading about particle physics in 1956 the same year I went autodidactic. I have been a terrible student ever since that day. At Eastern Oregon College I met a nuclear physicist that let me play with some hot stuff and some very fine bits of equipment. Through a convoluted series of events I bypassed a route to CERN and went to ASU, Tempe, AZ to work with David Hestenes but wound up in Dr. R. Roy's experimental nuclear physics group. I like to say I am a zero energy elementary particle physics specializing in tracking and characterizing low levels of short-lived isotopes in the environment.
Here is the glitch, anything written more than about 100 years ago suffers from the lack of knowledge of quantum mechanics. While we use a brain evolved to interpret "reality" in a way that is by definition "classical", "reality" is in fact manifestly not classical.
I like the way David Mermin's comment (paraphrasing I think), I have never encounter an interpretation of quantum mechanics I did not dislike., as he was presenting his Ithaca Interpretation of QM. We are in a bind of using a classical thinking to describe a reality that is not classical. So, the point is we need to teach ourselves to stop imposing a classical weltanschauung upon our subject. Robert Griffiths also has some interesting things to say about interpretation free approaches to QM.
This is a problem that is not restricted to some esoteric aspect of science, as I was trying to say in various ways on Daily Kos about a year ago, until I got hounded out of that place.
Or, perhaps I have nothing of any import to offer and should just shut up and go away.
no post, doubled
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Funny
I remember this one from Junior High.
Science-speak
I think I'm in love. I could do this all day. You single? lol
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
There is a joke
about entanglement in there somewhere but I'm too tired to think of it at the moment.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” -Voltaire
That would be a stretch . . . Ta-Bump-Tish
Probably.
But I don't think quantum entanglement has much to do with human consciousness.
If it does, Professor PriceRIP hasn't explained it very well.
Or at all.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Actually that isn't even the topic under discussion
Is this?
What is this? As you mature your brain management overrides "quantum spontaneity"?
What are you talking about?
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
Oh hell no!
There is a reason minors can not be held accountable as adults. The above is just a thumbnail sketch of the "why" that forms a part of my lecture series.
Thanks
Will your lectures be available on the web or TED or somewhere?
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
This medium . . .
I don't lecture. I teach (passive verb) by encouraging students to learn (active verb). This medium does not lend itself well to my approach to the process, so I suspect not.
Sorry for confusion, but you referred to
"my lecture series" above.
And I should like to know how the active verb "to teach", "enseigner", "lehren", "o~ppetama", "insegnare", "docere", "didaxein", etc. could be considered a passive verb?
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
The common term is lecture
I figured out a long time ago that my students were not learning from me but rather I was providing an environment to inhance their abilities to learn. No two people learn the same way. In a very specific way I am "learning disabled". I failed the fifth grade (think about that a moment, how do you fail the fifth grade?), About three weeks into the second year in the fifth grade my teacher apologized for making the mistake of holding me back. He figured out that I learned by solving puzzles: for example he asked the class to consider the dilemma of young Carl Friedrich Gauss adding strings of numbers. I was the only one to "figure out the trick". And other stories and vignettes from others I have known reinforce this point.
Our educational crisis is rooted in the lack of understanding this foundational point. Universal standardized testing with its concomitant commodification is undermining our educational system. Far too many students have tuned out, as I have seen them over the past few years at the University of Nebraska at Kearney.
This is all very interesting but OT.
and a diversion from what you originally set out to accomplish - planning. On your next iteration of the planning topic, I suggest you put these kinds of musings in a separate essay. If you are trying to herd cats, don't distract them!
In the long term
In the longer term
Think big! The system is corrupted by sate election laws. There is no reason why a National office (like the Presidency) should not be voted on nationally.
Also
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
I would add to this
Early voting nationwide
Election Day as a national holiday
Yaldabaoth, Saklas I'm calling you. Samael. You're not alone. I said, you're not alone, in your darkness. You're not alone, baby. You're not alone. "Original Sinsuality" Tori Amos
Term limits
In California term limits were used to get rid of effective Democrats. Should we term limit surgeons, airline pilots, or physicists? What we need to get rid of is the source of corruption, corporate money in politics.
Term limits
In California term limits were used to get rid of effective Democrats. Should we term limit surgeons, airline pilots, or physicists? What we need to get rid of is the source of corruption, corporate money in politics.
Fair Elections With Verifiable Results
There are so many problems with the current electoral system, what with black box voting machines, uncounted provisional ballots, limited and inadequate polling facilities, onerous voter ID laws, and various and sundry other methods of voter suppression and out and out electoral fraud, I believe nothing short of a constitutional amendment to enforce a uniform standard on the entire nation will truly solve the problem.
Advocating for such an amendment would be a great way to unify progressive citizens behind an effort that would stand at least a fighting chance of success, and would make a major positive difference in future political campaigns. Basically you would have to get some credible people with expert knowledge and impeccable credentials together to draw up such an amendment, a sympathetic Representative to introduce it in Congress, and then it would be up to us to start beating the bushes to garner the necessary support. Best way to do that would be to organize a voter boycott against any elected official who refuses to support the amendment.
Pitching it along the lines of: If a Congressman or Senator is not willing to stand up and safeguard the rights of voters, he or she is not worth voting for. I think this is a potentially powerful message that would resonate with a lot of people, not to mention that it cuts across party and ideological lines.
inactive account
Yes, agree.
There are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know.
The majority of our elected officials have zero interest
in changing the status quo. Works for them. Just not for us. And the layers of elected officials, congress and then all those damn state houses currently operated by forces of evil or no-good.
My premise is that any person in elected office is now suspect. No use to make lists of the bad players, find the few who seem to be toeing the line. And make them tow.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I'm on a tablet, so I will be terse. This site can be used to
brain storm, communicate, educate, rabble-rouse, organize and what have you, but I see little likelihood that it will itself, become a political party, reincarnation of SDS, clone of move-on, etc. I see it as far more likely that individuals and groups thereof, ad hoc and otherwise, will coalesce around various proposed actions, goals, action plans, etc. Some persons will no doubt be monofocal and others multifocal, and there is no harm in that.
As to specifics, keep in mind that the most easily and readily accomplished goals will most likely attract the most participants and the highest level of participation from them. They are also most likely to generate broad coalitions. Thus, making election day a national holiday is far more likely to get serious traction than something requiring a Constitutional amendment, such as eliminating the electoral college.
Also, we're non-partisan which crates a strange twist. Obviously, everybody in the whole country will benefit if the democratic party becomes more democratic, but that will only resonate with some members. Meanwhile the mere fact that we are non-partisan is certain to lessen the democratic party's responsiveness to anything we say or do.
That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power. -- Franklin D. Roosevelt --