Solon Challenge - Leading Questions, Part One of Four

Q. We may have political problems, but aren’t things like global warming, poverty or the energy shortage more important?
A. Serious problems indeed. Confronting major problems requires healthy governments and international cooperation. Considering this, isn’t the world’s most immediate problem the national dysfunction that haunts nations? Over 100 rate poorly on corruption measures. Only a handful rate well on the scale of democracy. How can you fix a general problem if nations are turned inward fighting themselves?
Q. Why would I want to partake in a mock convention or Solon Challenge?
A. For one, it’s about as much intellectual fun as one can have without breaking the law. Second, here is a chance to ignore the status quo, local tradition or party. Instead, draw up something that counters human tendencies and enlarges modern possibilities.
Q. What’s your favorite constitution?
A. It hasn’t been written yet.
Q. Why not just call for actual constitutional conventions?
A. Formal conventions usually have the wrong persons asking the wrong questions. Mock conventions are freed from the constraint of justifying the status quo. Most nations now have controlling parties, tiny legislatures, fault-ridden mass elections, powerful unitary executives and imaginary budgets. Would you design this kind of polity if you had a blank tablet?
A Solon Challenge might look at current failures and propose something new. For example, the lower body of a three-part legislature might be part-timers who work from home using new study/interaction methods with the Internet. This body could be much larger than a sitting chamber – improving variety and coverage. Using a technique like this project’s Reflective – choosing representation by test and lottery – a Solon Challenge might, for this body, do away with mass elections in place of greater general participation. After all, the most often-voiced reasons for mass elections are the sense of having a say, of participating. Their downside - appeal to prejudice and selfish interest, reliance on propaganda, dependence on wealth - might be somewhat mitigated in an alternative system. The techniques above could “solve” the problems of party control. They might also prove useful in lessening the ancient reliance on the maximum leader and party-controlled judiciaries.
Q. Can you give us an example of a recent re-write that failed?
A. Bolivia. Years and blood have been spent in creating the model that will be voted on in this January. Most nations have a river called Nation which is formed by the tributaries Oligarchy and Populism. Oligarchy, which runs clear and is mostly sterile, typically predominates in the early years. Populism is dammed up. The heavier rains at its source eventually break the damn, as has happened in Bolivia. The Nation river is now a rich and muddy brew.
Predictably, judges will now be elected rather than appointed. This trades the corruption of elite control for the corruption of mob and purchase. In the U.S. states we have the latter corruptions. Millions are raised in Texas for judges who promise to be tougher on crime than their opponent, or who praise themselves as faithful to a party. In Minnesota a new Supreme Court justice won by running a bogus advertisement demeaning his opponent in a fraudulent manner.
A Solon Challenge would consider methods where judges were neither appointed nor elected.
Q. Isn’t this call for ten 2010 mock constitutional conventions just another way of saying you want nations to have actual conventions? In other words, your homeland of the U.S. should replace its 1787 model with a 2010 model, Mexico should replace its 1917 model, and so forth?
A. Not really. Consider that most nations form their founding document when newly formed, breaking away from colonialism or are picking up the pieces after being shattered. There is a “magic moment” when the nation agrees to invent itself. The U.S. had this in 1787; Germany had two magic moments in the 20th century, each after a devastating war.
Time goes by and constitutions become pieces of parchment, often revered like a book said to come from God. The magic moment has passed and now you have what I call a “Solon Paradox:” The more dysfunctional a nation, the more it needs a makeover, the less likely it will come from an existing template. Put another way, those who profit by dysfunction will likely cement their own power in a formal convention. A new U.S. convention, for example, might make the two look-alike parties the cornerstone of government. The 1787 consensus was the diametrically opposite: Government by party is mediocrity; second-rate persons will run it. A new convention would almost certainly salute mass elections – it’s now a rote chant that this kind of representative selection is the high water of republican government. Again, in 1787 there was no such adoration of what some uncharitably called “the mob.” The dean of U.S. political scientists said, fifty years ago, that the “only thing democratic about an American presidential election is an honest tabulation of the ballot.” Even this slim leaving is now contested.

Q. So what is the advantage of a Solon Challenge over an actual convention?
A. There are several advantages. First, the persons who partake do not come from the political or commercial world – they are not necessarily trying to profit in the way that actual delegates would. A convention in 1989 Russia would have seated Communists who felt that their world had crashed down because of enemies within. Their objective would have been to return to the old way, but without the bad guys. An actual convention in the U.S. today would have delegates fighting to retain the advantages of historical accidents, like those that Wyoming have a Senator representing 260,000 and one from California represent 18 million.
Second, the use of the Reflective allows entry of persons with fresh ideas. How do you give voice to the quiet persons who read the papers, who read heavy books, who have thought deeply about modern problems? It seems to me that good fortune is the most important ingredient in coining a solid constitution. That’s anti-science - not a good recipe for success.
Q. So what are the actual chances for any nations to partake in this project?
Wait, there’s one more key advantage of a mock over an actual convention.
The Solon Challenge model promotes the idea of institutional renewal. Jefferson wanted a new foundation every generation. He would have been good on cable news, where exaggeration is expected. But wasn’t he right that a modern constitution should have something built in that will provide regeneration? Every fifty years? Every 100 years? For example, only nine percent think that the U.S. is going in the right direction. Shouldn’t that trigger a genuine reexamination?
Now, to your question of realism. Why would China be opposed to a group of intellectuals conjecturing about a future government? Isn’t that preferable to chance by violence or the mob? Isn’t it more honest, more moderate? There’s no law that says any nation has to take the outcome of a Solon Challenge as the prevailing judgment of the entire nation. It’s a jumping point and how each nation continues the discussion says a lot about the integrity of that nation.
Q. Name some nations that you think might allow a Solon Challenge.
A. The U.S. and China, already mentioned. Israel and neighboring Egypt would be good prospects. The first has no written constitution; the second is in turmoil as it tries to be democratic with a large, discontented population. Many African countries and Italy certainly. Will India remain relatively stabile for another fifty years?
Would Iran allow a Solon Challenge? I doubt it, but wouldn’t it be electric if they did? Its leaders say that freedoms are large there - this would be their proof. I think of the Solon Challenge as the ultimate test of freedom: Will a nation allow a serious examination of how its practices differ from its founding principles and modern standards?
Q. Why do you call this the "Solon Challenge."
A. An early story of constitutional conflict comes from Athens. In disrepair, it turned to Solon who coined a unique constitution, overturning the harsh Draconian system. Solon said his offering was a compromise between excellence and prevailing prejudice.
Q. Can you name one benefit that might come from a Solon Challenge?
A. During the past dozen years Congress has stripped regulation from complex financial instruments called derivatives or credit swaps. At the same time representatives have collected hundreds of millions in so-called campaign donations from the players in these markets. The recent economic collapse resulted, in part, from this deregulation.
A Solon Challenge would have to ask: How do you prevent institutionalized corruption? This is a major question for every nation, not just the United States.
There is a chance for invention. A duel-track legislature is one example.
Q. What is a duel-track legislature?
A portion of the members are elected by the state custom and others gain entry by some measure of merit and lottery selection. The resulting legislature is composed of part political elite and part natural elite. The latter members may enter and remain without being "political" - they may not choose to belong to a party or publish any platform. A duel-track legislature that is split evenly is called a "balanced body." 
Q. What would be the advantage of a duel-track legislature?
There are many. Parties would have to adapt to gain the votes of independents. It would improve critical thinking by having discussions that were not framed by party labels or past antagonisims. It would allow better representation of diverse views and interests. It would cleave the notion that on a white can represent a white district, only a Catholic, only a rich or only a poor one from like districts. It would allow women equality without any need for quotas. The list is long.

.....
Please respond by emailing adultdemocracy at the website gmail.com. Replies will be posted soon. Thanks for participating.

Solon Challenge - Leading Questions, Part Two

Q. Why is it so difficult to establish or renew a plan of government?
A. Take the example of Benjamin Franklin, who drew up a plan of Union for the American colonies in 1754. At a temporary Congress held for purposes of national defense, he offered a simple plan for a permanent Congress. It had a President General appointed by the crown and a Grand Council chosen by the state assemblies. His plan passed unanimously.
When it was reviewed in England the idea was considered too democratic. The states took the opposite view: This national Congress would diminish their power. Neither authority liked it - often a sign that one is on to something.
In his biography Franklin said "History is full of the Errors of States and Princes." He offered,
Look round the habitable World, how few
Know their own Good, or knowing it pursue.
Franklin added,
Those who govern, have much Business on their hands, do not generally like to take the Trouble of considering and carrying into Execution such new Projects. The best public Measures are therefore seldom adopted from previous Wisdom, but forc'd by the Occasion.
Q. What do you say to an "originalist" who says a constitution is perfect?
A. This postion contains several peculiar notions - that something so human and subject to strife is perfect, that you know what someone long dead thought, and that these divines were consistent and considered such matters settled once and for all. It may be politically correct to believe that, but I doubt many intellectuals actually view their constitutions as they view their religions.
Q. How does the Solon Challenge improve the chances of a useful reappraisal on a nation's constitution?
A. Several ways.

1. Each participating nation has the resource of an international oversight body that helps it select participants and organize its operation.
2. The "Reflective" method gives each "2010 Convention" a way of selecting delegates by merit. Nobody is in the Convention because he or she is famous or is an elected officer or a party bigwig. Merit alone, as measured by a test on constitutional history and principles, is the first ticket into the Convention.
   
3. The use of a lottery for the final delegate selection confuses bias. All modern conventions have resembled legislatures: Local interests, party affiliation and celebrated leaders have dominated. The Reflective avoids this.
4. Ten nations will concurrently undertake extralegal conventions. There will be a kind of friendly competition to see how their final plans differ.
5. The international community will be drawn to the results of these informal conventions. The press cannot ignore something of this stature. The possibility of one or more nations instituting real change may be more probable than if an actual convention had taken place.
   

Q. Do you really think that a nation like China or Iran would allow its citizens to partake?
A. China has little to lose and much to gain. It will inevitably move away from a closely held authority to a government that will utilize the great number of well-educated citizens. Will it copy the system of the U.S. or France? Very doubtful. It will come up with something that borrows from modern history but is molded to China's unique people and situation. Why not use the Solon Challenge as a non-threatening experiement?
Iran? The Iyatollahs are not know as big fans of free speech. They do claim that the people of Iran have wide freedoms. The Solon Challenge is considered "The Ultimate Test of Freedom," because the freedom to discuss alternatives to present government is a fundamental freedom. And it's not like there aren't many Iranians who are citical of their government. In one telephone poll 61 percent said that they rejected a “political system where the ‘Supreme Leader’ rules according to religious principles, and cannot be chosen or replaced by a direct vote of the people.”
Let me add that my homeland, the U.S., may be even more resistant than Iran when it comes to renewing fundamental questions. It's also a test of freedom in a nation that is puffed with pride about its openness. The more dysfunctional the system, the more difficult it is to change; more than 70 percent of U.S. citizens show respect for its Executive and Congress in 2008. An all-time low of nine percent think the nation is headed in the right direction.
Q. Who would oppose a Solon Challenge?
A. If you're a U.S. plastic surgeon making several million a year, odds are you will oppose any move to universal health coverage. It's also likely that you'll say that it's because you feel that health standards will fall.
Politicians and party mechanics will say the same about any attempt to transform a prevailing system. They will imply that what we have is either the best of all worlds or the best compromise with reality.
Is the surgeon or the politician honest? I suggest that we don't need to judge. We simply have to open ourselves to experimentation. In the first case we have numerous nations where healthcare is more affordable. We can honestly look at general public health measures; we can evaluate medical practitioner and patient respect for the system.
When it comes to a political system, we can't make such judgments as easily. You can't compare Norway with Brazil. One has a homogeneous population of under five million with a substantial and aging middle class. The other has more persons without sewage connection in its largest city, Sao Paulo, than the entire population of Norway. Only a fool would say that Brazil should import Norway's constitutional monarchy whole cloth. Design of a system is much more complicated than that. You can incorporate elements that seem to work, to be sure, but the holistic design is complex and subject to local vagaries.
END PART TWO
Please send your questions and ideas to: adultdemocracy at the site gmail.com.

Solon Challenge - Leading Questions, Part Three

Q. Are constitutions all that important? After all, the German model of 1920 was celebrated for its promise of freedoms, its liberal standards.
A. Benjamin Franklin would be the first to say that it's customs, not laws that really count. (It can be a custom to ignore a law.) He added, "To get the bad customs of a country changed and new ones, though better, introduced, it is necessary first to remove the prejudices of the people, enlighten their ignorance, and convince them that their interests will be promoted by the proposed changes, and this is not the work of a day."
When the founding principles have been newly examined and ratified; when those living have confirmed or improved the works of the dead, then one's constitution and one's customs should become closely attuned.
Q. And what prevents the rise of a demagogue or a Hitler?
A. That is a fundamental topic for each Solon Challenge. Properly constructed, a national structure should be able to overcome natural calamity or economic depression without violence, chaos or the rise of a political savior.
Q. The Solon Challenge uses something called the "Reflective." What's that?
A. It's a temporary cohort which is chosen by merit, than chance. A Reflective has a specific goal. Each nation's Solon Challenge will have a general Reflective, chosen by some test of constitutional understanding. From that body a lottery selects the delegates for the extralegal 2010 constitutional convention.
Q. You say that a measure of merit should precede the lottery selection of each 2010 Convention. How is this accomplished?
A. That's up to each nation's discretion, with this proviso: The international advisory council must agree that the method is fair and open. If it confirms that the nation's test favors the rich, the entrenched or some faction, than it must be revised or else the project will not be included in the worldwide Solon Challenge.
The same goes for the lottery that selects the actual 2010 convention delegates. The international council must ensure that it is not fixed.
Q. Where does the funding for the Solon Challenge come from?
A. Each participant nation must come up with funding.
Q. What do you expect to achieve with the Solon Challenge, given that dysfunctional states resist change?
A. A fresh look is always useful. When the U.S. wrote its constitution in 1787, for example, it had no idea that national defense would become an "every second counts" matter, that world trade would become such an intimate aspect of survival, that yesterday's class distinctions would be now seen as repugnant.
Once a serious and respected body of a nation - not an underclass or a protesting minority - agrees on needed changes or a complete overhaul, the debate begins in earnest: Should that nation now have an official constitutional convention? If it did, how would you choose the delgates?

The normal ad hominem, or character assassination, that is cast on those who want change, is no longer in order. You now have to face the reality that an unbiased, meritorious sample of the population has reached some serious conclusions. This happy circumstance seldom happens by chance.
Q. Is there something beyond the nation level here - a new way of approaching regional conflict?
A. Consider the recent Russian incursion into Georgia. Each side put its own spin on matters, of course. But the international community was helpless. The U.N. Security Council could not act because it is not designed to engage in any conflict that is of interest to the major players. The Reflective used in the Solon Challenge could also be used as a new mechanism in such instances.
END PART THREE
Let's hear you ideas or comments: Write adultdemocracy at the site gmail.com.

Vote for the Solon Challenge - Week of Jan 27, 2009

What are the most important problems of our time? Some would look at the shrinking rivers, the lifeblood of seventy percent of the planet’s population, and say, global warming. Considering that 150 million died in the past century’s wars, and the specter of nuclear and biological weapons promises to quadruple that number in the next 100 years, others contend that terrorism/war is our greatest problem. Another view looks at the huge number of persons poor, underemployed and hungry and says that this is our most potent time bomb.

Consider, what is the common denominator or attribute to these three positions? Answer: Some kind of reflective hierarchy is required for any orderly solution. That 21^st Century organization is the nation state. But we know that over half of the world’s governments are in disarray or suffering growing pains. One must conclude that, whether your favorite problem is pollution, war or the poor, it’s just as valid to say that the world’s greatest problem today is government dysfunction. Only by fixing this predicament, can we have a chance at other resolutions.The Solon Challenge attacks the problem of widespread government dysfunction.

What?

In 2010 the Solon Challenge will sponsor extralegal constitutional conventions in ten nations. This exercise will examine the form of current governments and ask basic questions about how these forms might meet the modern needs of stabile, flexible and reflective government. The project is extralegal because it is somewhere between difficult and impossible for most nations to have an actual, useful constitutional convention that does not promote fear and opposition from the standing powers.

How?

Using seed money from a Google Prize, an international board will help the ten nations organize their informal conventions using a method (the Reflective) that select delegates by merit and lot.

Who?

The international board will be composed of leading world thinkers and constitutional authorities. Each participating nation will have its own oversight board, similarly composed. Test and lot will choose the 2010 convention participants, so that no prevailing bias will dictate the delegate composition or the discussions.

Outcome?

The Solon Challenge will engage the world in a discussion of how nations can either improve their existing systems or move to new models. Within a few years we can expect many to move away from a reliance on a strongman or ritual factions to systems that tap the educated in a kind of routine that improves stability while expanding freedoms.

Details and Methods?

Future posts will flesh out this proposal. You are invited to contribute to the discussions. Send your ideas or comments to: adultdemocracy at the website gmail.com.