>I think there is a certain discomfort with these sorts of "good
>government" solutions since they play into the hands of the technocratic
>wing of the Dems who assume that all problems have to do not with
>institutionalized social and economic injustice, but with poorly
>engineered governmental machinery. So while I agree that proportional
>representation would help, as a strategic matter I think progressives are
>better off organizing around issues which go directly to the heart of the
>increasing class polarization which "good government" types (such as Gore
>and Bradley) have been directly responsible for in recent decades.
thank you thank you thank you. i asked this question about two years ago. i fail to see how proportional representation is any sort of answer. it seems to me that such an approach presumes that groups of people think alike, based on identity.
i dont *think* so.
i guess i just think it's the height of ignorance to presume that black people think alike, or latinos, or whathaveyou. i mean come on! the elian controversy? are all asian-pacific islanders alike? what about women? (the question i asked last time was with regard to that issue.)
sure, there are identifiable empirical consistencies, but when you look closely they are a wash -- largely statistically insignificant.
not even to mention that it seems a ridiculously divisive move given the backlash politics we're dealing with.