Part 6: Increasing Liberty Through Jury/Conventions
“Experience is a better guide than reason.”
The notion that the Federal Convention of 1787 was a sort of giant brainstorming session where all sorts of new ideas were batted around-- and somehow from this whirling mix the delegates invented a new government — is absurdly wrong. Like successful men in any field, the Framers adhered strongly to forms that had already been tested and proven through historical experience.
They were open to new ideas, but only if those ideas could pass a 'practical reality' test: Had such a structural arrangement been tried before? How did it work out? What were the reasons for its success or failure? And so on.
Likewise, we should choose the most appropriate, successful models from our history to construct a Constitutional method for publicly nominating non-party candidates. The two most successful models to apply are the Jury and the Convention.
This section of THE RIGHT TO NOMINATE details how the best features of the jury system and of conventions can be combined to form a nominating Body, drawn from the full voter registry (as juries are); sworn to do this service for the whole community (as juries do); and then meeting openly (as a Convention) to efficiently nominate, from a list of those recommended by the people, candidates who are proven in life through their honest conduct and honest treatment of fellow citizens, and through an earned reputation for fairness, ability, and good judgment.
TRUE CIVIL DISCOURSE
As such juries gather to consider possible candidates, they of course will meet with them and engage in face to face discussions. The list of possible candidates will be made up of names recommended by the people, as being the most respected persons in the community.
Not egotists, or self-promoters; not job-seekers or film-flam artists; not the boastful or liars, not people without morals or values, not accusers and dividers; NOT party politicians!
These will be people who have won the respect of those who know them. The discussions held with them will be open to public view; respectful; dedicated to honesty, full of courtesy; and conducted by their fellows and peers on the jury so as to elicit their honest thoughts,
Interviews will NOT be done by arrogant or biased or amoral media personalities who interfere and befoul public discussions in order to promote their own agenda.
What a powerful and honest, refreshing atmosphere for our elections! This is how it should have been, all along!
The parties, if they so choose, will remain free to roll in garbage at their own conventions, and try to blow the smell from that onto voters.
But the difference will be that the people will now have a real choice that includes an ever-renewed spring of 'people's nominees', as well as the usual party candidates. (Not a restricted, "parties-only" primary charade leading to more "parties-only" elite government for the benefit of a few.)