International Observers

Joi Ito found a good article on the International Herald Tribune about what international observers are saying about our election process. Joi’s comment on the last two paragraphs is good. I’m one of those Americans who travels internationally. I don’t do it because I have affiliation to another country (unless we finally get the New York succession movement going), but because I have friends and family overseas, I like to travel and because of work and research. When you leave the farm you realize how small the world is. I know it’s trite, but it’s true. The sad thing is that the debate about our place in the world mimics the debates we had in this country about the development of urban centers; it’s about contact with the “other.” The problem with Empire is that it is all about the “other.” Can’t eat your cake and have it too, and I don’t think the Republicans have understood that yet. I’m waiting for the rebirth of a conservative movement in this country. Isolationist and xenophobic makes much more sense than expansionist and xenophobic.

2 thoughts on “International Observers

  1. It’s an interesting article, though most of the criticism seems a reflection on the decentralization that is, at least in theory, essential in the system. As far as the Constitution is concerned, the manner in which each state chooses its electors is utterly at the discretion of the state legislature. I don’t think that, in theory, a given state has to hold presidential elections at all. You can argue that this makes no sense anymore — but it’s not an accident, it’s the way the country was written.
    But then, individual states should still get their acts together.

Comments are closed.