Category Archives: Dewey

White Supremacy is Anything But Supreme, Just In Case You Were (for Whatever Reason) Having Doubts

Prejudice operates on anti-intellectual and non-philosophical thought – it is based upon unexamined societal customs and biases that persist across generations often in complete disregard of veracity and of rationality- and is therefore a mode of thinking that is unfit and ultimately detrimental toward the cultivation of a Great Society. Because prejudice has a tendency to be extreme in its discrimination, it ensures the oppression of “X” (a filler for any oppressed group) sect of society. If “X” sect of society is oppressed and silenced socially, the same oppression will become solidified through laws in state and federal dominions. Whatever decisions come about in society will not reflect the values or worries of the entirety of society, and thus tragically hinder efforts of progressive reform and social betterment.

White supremacists of today uphold similar antagonistic ideals that racists of earlier American eras did; by deliberately aiming toward the exclusion of non-whites from society/government-building processes, they deny minorities/marginalized people the ability to realize their true human individualities to become free and productive members of society. Racial supremacists’ fixation on the past and the comfortable loftiness white life held provides no impetus for positive or liberatory social change. The hatefulness in racial prejudice and supremacy is so narrow-minded in its goal to remain at the apex of the perceived social hierarchy, that progress is disregarded since their energy is instead focused on the continuation of oppression in hopes of maintaining dominance and the existing conceptions of normalcy. Considering that America is becoming less and less white, white supremacists lose whatever petty “virtues” (if they are even deserving of the word (they aren’t 8-) )) they held simply by constituting a majority.

A dream America, for racists, is one that is socially and intellectually stagnant and that has been rendered vulnerable to internal and international strife — it is naive and quite delusional to assume that
1. change will not arise in one way or another, i.e. violent revolt or outside intervention, and that,
2. other nations will display kindness or support, let alone wait for the United States to catch up to contemporary philosophical ideals of enlightenment, sciences, the human condition, etc.
The foreseeable future of a United States that is continually held back by racial prejudice is one of immense and avoidable failure.

Racial bias is incapable of fostering pragmatic philosophical thoughts that are necessary in keeping social and governmental conditions wholly relevant and effective throughout changing conditions and in perpetuity. When diversity is embraced, a society can draw from all sorts of experiences, cultures, and wisdoms to craft and, when the time comes, reshape a productive and intelligent community.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

Another Mass Shootings Post

Last weekend, America was shocked by yet another mass shooting incident.  Nearly 50 people were shot, with 27 of those being fatalities.  Just minutes after the news broke, social media became a frenzy and the two very distinct sides of the gun debate reemerged.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regardless of which side of the second amendment a person stands on, everyone (I would hope) can agree on one thing: Devin Kelley should have never been able to purchase a gun.  Unlike the Las Vegas shooter, who had no criminal record and little mental health history other than a Valium prescription, Kelley had a longstanding and well documented criminal and mental health background.

Kelley’s colorful past included him serving time imprisoned for beating his wife and cracking his stepson’s scull, for which he received a ‘bad conduct’ discharge from the Air Force.  He had been institutionalized in a mental health facility, and at one point he briefly escaped.  He had an animal cruelty charge that kept him from obtaining a license to carry in Texas.  He was arrested in New Mexico after sneaking guns onto an Air Force base in an alleged attempt to carry out death threats.  And, to top it all off, he was the suspect in an unsolved rape case.

Nonetheless, Kelley was able to pass the background check required to buy guns on four separate occasions and in two different states.  In a time when we can share information across the world in just seconds, it is absurd that none of his history showed up.  The sheer amount of times he slipped through the cracks shows that this failure was no anomaly, but the result of a systematic issue.

Despite the fact that everyone wants these shootings to stop, the gun control issue has become so polarized that it seems there’s no way to mediate the topic.  There is no discussion when it comes to the gun debate, only insults thrown.  Both sides are so strongly dedicated to their stances that no one is willing to communicate with each other.  The politicians who have the power to make the change seem to be too worried about upsetting their constituencies to put forth bipartisan regulation.  Instead, the Democrats push for overly ambitious bills while Republicans push for the opposite.

The only way we will be able to move past this is if we communicate.  There are thousands of studies on this topic, and every citizen needs to work to try and understand the actual research, rather than just spewing their (uneducated) opinions.  The longer we remain stalemated in our prideful viewpoints, the more lives will be lost.  We must listen to each other and try to understand others’ reasons for their beliefs in order to compromise.  Then, and only then, we will be able to come to a gun control solution that works for everyone and actually passes into law.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

Dewey on Anti-Harassment Training

What seems like a random influx of sexual harassment accusations and depositions in the media, is actually a result of generations and generations of gender oppression. Throughout history, women have been deemed inferior to their male counterpart, often seen as less credible, or less intelligent. This mentality has not only threatened the safety of women, but has allowed men their free will in exchange for women’s.

As more and more victims of sexual harassment step forward to admit their experiences in hopes of helping others, it’s no surprise an uprise of allegations regarding members of the House and Senate has ensued. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan announced the House is adopting a policy change that mandates all members and staff of Capitol Hill partake in anti-discrimination and anti-harassment training. Though this policy is directed towards both men and women, as anyone is at risk for experiencing unwanted sexual remarks/advances, its creation still shows that women’s voices are becoming more powerful.

This policy that lawmakers are setting into place is the least the government could do in terms of preventing sexual harassment in the workplace, but it is something John Dewey would solemnly agree with. Dewey, a notable philosopher and respected educator, strongly advocated for democracy and believed school is where social reform takes place. Ryan’s efforts to address the issue align with Dewey’s ideology, in that learning is a social and interactive process that, in turn, could be used to improve social interactions.

As someone who believed the government exists to serve the community, one could conclude that in order to begin combating sexual harassment, Dewey would have first determined if the issue at hand affected the community as a whole, i.e determining whether or not something is a private or public matter. With an issue like sexual harassment, the victim in the situation is having their rights infringed upon, stripped of their free will as they’re forced to succumb to unwanted inappropriate advances. But how does that affect the public? As Dewey stated in The Public and Its Problems, under a chapter titled The Eclipse of the Public, “American democratic polity was developed out of genuine community life, that is, association in local and small centres where industry was mainly agricultural and where production was carried on mainly with hand tools” (101). And as society progressed, community life became increasingly complicated, forcing people to begin making decisions based on the collective whole they were a part of, and not solely based on themselves as individuals in said community.

Sexual harassment is a public matter because it affects individuals; individuals who have the potential to do great by the world can be temporarily, if not permanently, affected by a negative experience, and ultimately their dreams and aspirations could be placed on hold or tossed out entirely due to someone else’s selfish desires. When these victims give up their dreams, it negatively impacts the community, as their ideas could’ve been revolutionary for society but will remain undiscovered, unable to surface above the harsh memory, depriving everyone else a chance at a better tomorrow.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

Education Reform = Compulsory Community Service

 

The school to prison pipeline is becoming an unavoidable problem in our society. I will not accept anything less than a complete reform of the way we educate our youth today and every day until our education system reflects our democratic values. While a core curriculum of math, science, history and literature are important aspects of our educational culture; we can no longer ignore the gaps we create in our children’s education when it comes to giving them a sense of community and service.

I believe in mandatory community work for every citizen seeking a public and higher education. They must dig deep within their community, truly engross themselves in the servitude of the people to understand themselves and become a clearer piece of a larger picture. Incarcerated youth who grow to unfortunately become incarcerated adults cannot succeed in a democratic society that does not incorporate the value of community service and social support into an already compulsory education. We cannot only focus on molding our children’s minds we must teach them how to be compassionate as well as hard working. We must also teach our citizens that working hard only to benefit one’s own life is not what is best for our community and our posterity.

What happens if we learn that we are valued at the rate in which we produce goods. If we only see our worth through our jobs, what can we fall back on when we lose everything? When our job is taken from us, when we lose our sense of self and our sense of worth in a society that cannot find value in us, who is surprised when we resort to criminal ways? What service could society have given us?

We must teach our children to value the harmony of service and not the capitalist gain of self-service. We must become become one living breathing entity that represents our democratic values on the micro level. Democracy can only prosper if the citizens can see themselves reflected in our values. Once our citizens can see themselves in others, once there is a greater sense of community we will not be forced to lock our children away only to relocate them to a stricter facility when they become of age. If we teach our sons and daughters a trade that will only benefit a capitalist machine in place of an emotional and empathetic education we are letting them down.

Our citizens are more than what they have memorized behind concrete walls for eight hours a day, five days a week. They can become more and understand more once empathy becomes a concrete part of our curriculum. Arts and science are valuable assets to the betterment of the self but compassion and service are more likely benefit the society as a whole as well.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

Media Bias in the 2016 Presidential Election

The endless quarrel between Secretary Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election has ignited discussion in almost every form. Whether it be in person, on Facebook, or in the classroom, everyone seems to be talking about the heated election. With early voting already in session and election day right around the corner, I would like to draw attention to how the news has discussed both candidates and how they have handled media coverage throughout the campaign period. Although every television station and news distributor is eager and required to cover each candidate, if we analyze articles and clips from particular news websites we can easily see the patterns and themes within their tone and amount of coverage. Furthermore, through such analysis, we can easily see that modern-day news stations are highly political and biased in their coverage. It is of upmost importance that voters be informed and educated during this important time of year, but also develop opinions and beliefs on their own and without the influence of the news they read and watch daily. With this in mind, we can see how such coverage could influence and sway a voter in a certain direction. By highlighting the wrongdoings of the journalism industry, voters can make well-informed decisions and formulate opinions about who is better qualified to be President of the United States.

Taking into consideration the number of news stations in America, for my analysis I will focus on only a few. By taking note of the existing trends in American media, it’s easily recognizable that certain news stations have deeper political roots than others. The evidence is reflected in the average audience political affiliations. Specifically, according to a Business Insider survey, on average “Fox’s audience leans conservative, while CNN, ABC, CBS, and NBC have audiences that lean left.” Among the newspapers, the New York Times and the Huffington Post identifies more with liberal audiences and USA Today tends to grab the attention of left wing readers. While some news distributors pride themselves on neutral and balanced news coverage, many of the most popular news stations and papers lean on one side or the other. With regards to the current election, we must consider the type and amount of coverage each candidate has received and from what source. For example, throughout his presidential campaign, Donald Trump has claimed the mainstream media is corrupt and is poisoning the minds of American voters. Even more, he has suggested that the biased media are “Hillary Clinton’s lapdogs in the presidential election.” Perhaps Trump is alluding to the 200 plus newspapers that have already endorsed Hillary Clinton. In sum, both candidates seem to be receiving the same amount of media coverage, but Trump has had more negative coverage in comparison to Clinton. This presidential election may have the most lopsided media coverage the US has ever seen. To many, his claims may seem outrageous, but Trump brings to light a serious issue for voters that is applicable even outside of the election season. With the media influencing their audiences, voters are unable to formulate opinions about policy on their own.

trumpchyron1

To those who speculate the reality of media bias, Huffington Post writer, Jeffrey Ann Goudie, admits that journalists are individuals with their own political affiliations and beliefs. In response to his claims, she suggests that “before bashing the media, Trump needs to know what I learned in J-School, that the media do have a bias – for fact-gathering and for trying to tell the truth.” Regardless of the intentions behind the news coverage, the influence the media has on it’s audience is manipulative and persuasive. From my own work of The Public and its Problems: Search for the Great Community, I would like to emphasize that “the adulteration of knowledge is due not to its use, but to vested bias and prejudice, to one-sidedness of outlook, to vanity, to conceit of possession and authority, to contempt or disregard of human concern in its use.” We must continue to expose the influence of the media and encourage voters to educate themselves, formulate opinions, and choose the candidate they believe will guide our nation in the right direction.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

The Importance Of Education

There are many threats to the development of the Great Society and they often arise from suppression of the individual. One of the most pertinent threats to modern society has been the disproportionality of education available to people. Every individual is in possession of extraordinary capacity to solve problems and build society and this capacity for good needs to be encouraged and trained. Every person is in possession of this ability, but some people need more help and resources than others in order to properly nurture this latent ability. This is where education becomes key. By continuing to allow educational dead zones we are influencing the growth of systemic disadvantages. When an individual is deprived of proper education, they are denied the chance to rise to their potential. When an individual is denied their potential, all of society loses out on the chance at betterment.

Every person has the latent ability to learn complex subjects and to apply this knowledge for the benefit of all of society. Only when citizens are informed and organized that they can feel the true efficacy of their actions. Many people expect automatic greatness from each other but in reality these developments take time. How can an individual be expected to rise to greatness if they are not given the necessary tools? People need to have all the same educational advantages available to them so that it is possible society to continue to elevate itself. Too many people are caught in cycles of poverty, crime, and general disadvantage because they were not given the proper nurturing environment to aid the development of their individual importance. These systemic disadvantages make it all to easy for people to be looked down upon by other members of society for not providing “appropriate contribution”. Lack of education is making it easier for people to divide themselves, to become separate groups that comprise malformed “mini societies” rather than a great, inclusive society. When individuals are lost to the malpractice of this inefficient system, we lose out on further enlightenment that benefits the ascension of our species.

An important facet of a healthy society is the ease of communication and action between groups of people. It is important to realize that when a member of society is lost to these systemic disadvantages, we all experience a negative impact. We lose the potential for our thoughts, prejudices, and philosophies to be expanded upon. Every person deprived of his or her potential is a direct loss to society as a whole. The goal of society is to improve upon itself and allowing every individual to contribute to the collective is imperative to this mission. We should not look to blame one another for the loss of this potential. Instead, we need to plainly realize that in order for the output of society to be good, the input must also be good. Individuals and their power are the key to the Great Society. In order to create the Great Society, we must help each other so that we can work for the benefit of all.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

The Importance Of A Vote

There has been a disturbing trend in modern American democracy, one that has become even more pervasive and entrenched as we progress into the new millennium. This issue has become a malignancy on the development of the Great Society and serves to hinder the progress of democracy as we know it. This important issue that I bring to light is the non participation and apathy of the average American voter. Many Americans question the efficacy of their vote and its impact on society, which has led to a new generation of voters who find themselves out of touch with their government. These disillusioned voters can no longer see the connection between the action of voting and the implementation of policy. Essentially, this demoralized citizenry feel as though they are small, ineffective cogs in the machine.

What these disillusioned voters need to realize is that the true value of an idea or action is in the problems it attempts to solve. While it is possible to critique this position as being too hopeful or “pie in the sky”, I would say that it is heavily based on reality. The only way society continues to progress in this very real and grounded reality is by the spread of ideas and the development of opinion. At its core, society is the conglomeration of individuals. It is not a uniform, homogenous blob of opinion but rather an infinitely faceted grouping of people that espouses many different viewpoints, ideas, and dreams. Every person everywhere matters, and most importantly, we also matter to each other. If we hide our opinions or adopt policies of inaction, then we are devaluing the importance of ourselves of society as a whole. It’s importance to realize that even though our actions may not have immediately tangible effects, they contribute to the greater mass of thought and opinion that make up a well-educated and free society. By not voting or acting on the issues that are important to us as individuals, we are lowering the value of our own intellectual power and the intellect of society as a whole.

When a citizen feels a lack of efficacy in their efforts, it is because they feel alone and powerless when faced with the greater forces of society. I encourage people to realize that they are not alone and that their hopes and ideas are significant to many people. There exist groups, foundations, and organizations for every problem conceivable. If you find something to be important, chances are someone else has felt the same way too. I encourage us all to seek these people out and act alongside them so that we can see our problems aren’t insignificant and they are indeed shared with society. It is only by acting and becoming truly exposed to societal issues that you will find these kindred souls and become aligned with them. Once you find these people, move together to find other idealists who you don’t agree with and work to develop your thoughts among each other. The true measure of a society is the communication and action between people of different backgrounds, hopes, and interests. It is only through action that you can expose yourself to society at large. This is the only way to truly feel the power of your individual self and the resounding effect you have on the people around you. Everyone needs each other. Go vote.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

A Community of Distracted Driving

Communication between individuals will support the shared interest towards the ambition of a great community. Singular individuals are now experiencing the eclipse of their public due to a lack of interrelated concentration that will unify an otherwise barren and empty society. Take for instance, the defilement of public safety aroused by persons who engage in texting while driving. I fully approve of the bill anticipating approval in Washington D.C. to enact this stern reprimand of those who utilize a hand-held device when operating a motor car. Populaces that corrupt the law by texting and driving are soon to face a significantly more severe punishment if caught in the act.

Society has generally developed into a state of passive ignorance for the effects of their actions and the impact that is inherited upon other. While people are subject to social influences that determine they can think of, plan or choose, their tentative courses of actions invariably will unescapably bear an impression upon those around them. With this injurious social trend of texting and driving, some of these impressions are more inedible than others. Consequences such as financial devastation, caustic injury, and definite mortality are the most prospective of effects that can possibly transpire against innocents.

distracted-driving-2

While a terrifying and potential reality, texting and driving is a simple matter but yet proves to be quite devastating. However, in order to progress towards the great community, we must take action by believing in our citizens. Citizens are intelligent or can learn to be intelligent; citizens can engage in public affairs and intelligently elect representatives. As they have made, the D.C. council will vote upon this bill that will ensure an incentive based off unembellished penance. While I fully in support of this bill, the encouragement of understanding the dangerous action shall be promoted to the most widespread degree. In relative communication of society towards a shared greater goal, we deem our elected rulers as responsible with the power of the positive conversion.

An inordinate fault upon the pursuit of a community that is safe from texting and driving is the community’s breakdown in association. As I expressed in “The Search for the Great Community” section of The Public and its Problems, calling a matter a public opinion that is not rooted within fact does not rightly make it so. An action and its justification lead astray a false pretense and influence of what is beneficial to society. Many individuals do not view texting and driving as a force to be reckoned when it comes to the welfare of their lives and the wellbeing of those around them.

Vertical interaction amongst all passes of society, from the abdicants of the law to the upholders of the law to the regulators of the law, can effectively sway public opinion towards a form of knowledge rather than a form of opinion. Public cynicism and apathy provide a challenging obstacle for progress, yet the aforementioned belief in the citizens and spread of public fact dismiss any notion or skeptic thought. Men feel they are caught in the sweep of forces too vast to understand or master. Yet political and social interests provide an escape of ignorance for the public. Admittingly, there is too much pageantry in the public, however communication about the dangers of texting and driving form organizations that renovate ideas and ideals.

An effective engine of improvement is a step towards the great community, but for this vision to ever be possible; an enlightenment of knowledge and democracy has to been enacted. This bill in Washington D.C. provides an alternative from the eclipse of the public. An approval, a public knowledge, and a belief in the citizens, elections, and association have to be generated. Texting and driving pose a appalling threat, yet the bill that spreads awareness and provides incentive spawns a community built fact rather than public opinion. A new age of human relationships has shaped into being a deterrent of individual existence and a step towards the great community.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

The Checklist Manifesto — A Liberal’s Guide to Effective Voting in a Complex Modern Society

71cwwicjhul

When I wrote The Public and its Problems in 1927, I was concerned that American life had become endlessly complex, which I believed negatively affected the public’s efficacy in political action. Today, almost 100 years later, this assessment is more relevant than ever. Somehow we managed to multiply this complexity many times over. Modern life is full of wondrous distractions which I could not even have imagined in 1927. Before, I was worried about movies, radio, magazines and motor cars. Now, they have invented flat screen TVs and the internet. One can watch movies, read magazines, and stream every song ever created on her iPad any time of day. What is more, she can play Angry Birds, one of a million mindless iPad games, while listening to dubstep on her headphones and scrolling through Facebook in between games. Modern life only barely requires consciousness. (And they now make motor cars that can go over 200 mph!) So it is no surprise that so many people claim to be uninterested in politics, or that they do not vote because it doesn’t matter, because it “doesn’t affect their lives.” In a sense, it truly doesn’t, as so much of life now consists of playing on one’s iPad, which one can do regardless of the president.

But an even deeper, and still yet inchoate, issue is that, should one desire to organize an effective public toward the end of political action, doing so in an informed way can be seemingly impossible. The difficulty of understanding all the technology and science involved in the modern political process is a quite significant barrier to entry. We hear daily of expectations for the economy based on economic models said to account for jobs reports, unemployment, consumer price index, and whether the Fed will raise rates. Agriculture and industry as well involve science that perplex all but the few who have specialized in their respective science over the course of an entire career. How many people truly understand the science behind genetically modified foods, or even how their motor cars use gasoline to run? And issues of pollution and global warming resulting from modern life are discussed in terms of advanced scientific models. How is the average American expected to be politically active in a society involving such complexity? How could one even make an informed voting decision? People simply do not have the time to attain the knowledge required to fully understand the intricacies of each of these issues. Even becoming well-acquainted with one or two would be quite a serious undertaking, and no doubt the issue would quickly morph as newer and newer technologies become available and advance the problem into further complexity. So it appears that for the American people, voting based on a deep understanding of the complexity of all the issues is an infeasible undertaking. On the basis of what, then, is the American public supposed to vote?

I am reminded of Atul Gawande’s book, The Checklist Manifesto. Gawande is a surgeon who recognized the extraordinary complexity of modernity in his own field, medicine and surgery. He generalizes the observation to all of modern life, which contains endless complexity, as I have described. Gawande argues that, though it may seem beneath us, using a checklist can often be a quite effective way to cope with the extraordinary complexity of many modern problems. For example, he describes how the use of checklists in emergency rooms and in surgeries have helped to keep people from skipping over what appear to be trivial steps that could in fact have life-or-death consequences. He applies this to other domains like piloting large and complex aircraft and making financial decisions. Gawande suggest that even domain experts should often use checklists, because the complexity of many domains is such that one often forgets to consider all the basics. If experts should be using checklists to make decisions in complex situations, surely the average American should not try in vain to understand the ins and outs of every political issue.

I advocate the use of checklists by Americans when making voting decisions. In the presidential debates alone, we hear so many appeals to facts and statistics that verifying each of these instances in an efforts to make a fully informed voting decision would be impossible. And this is just one of many political races in the current election season: simultaneously informing oneself fully on the issues and facts discussed by one’s state representatives, railroad commissioner and judges, in addition to the president and dozens others, is incomprehensible. It would be far beyond a full-time job. Yet voters should not altogether ignore facts and science and expert opinion. Rather, voters should compile some rules of thumb regarding appeal to these facts and expert opinions. A so-called voting checklist consists of a collection of such rules of thumb. We can thus canalize the use of science effectively into Americans’ voting decisions. Doing so would morph the inchoate public into a politically powerful public with an effective and organized voting strategy.

 

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey

Moneyball for Government — The New Liberal Ideal?

It may once have been reasonable for the public to enact social change on the basis of principles alone. Though these principles did not in themselves justify the political action, they tended to promote the liberty of the individual to develop to fulfill his or her own fullest potential, and insofar as they had such consequences these principled political actions were justified. Specifically I mean that the individualistic liberal societal attitude of which I often speak was right to apply principled ideals of liberty in achieving personal freedom. Such actions canalized the development of individual liberty such that it tended toward liberty of the development of the individual. As such these were the actions necessary for their time.

Yet times have changed, and the relevance of such principled action has long passed. Rather than stay out of the way, the government has rightly restored some of its power to promote liberty, a development which we saw over the course of the 20th Century. This was the type of political action suited to the times, as the earlier individualistic liberalism, despite its advances in liberty, had the negative effect of granting what was once the government’s power to large corporations, allowing them dominance over the laboring class. This situation necessitated the regrowth of the scope of government, this time with an emphasis on the government’s ability to promote individuals’ liberty. We saw this through such as examples as FDR’s “Second Bill of Rights.”

However this was still principled action, though in the opposite direction, meaning that the principle tended to promote the expansion rather than the restriction of government programs. (The 2nd Bill of Rights serves again as an example of such principles.) Yet in the current times our society has shifted yet again such that no such principled approach can be the most efficient means of securing the liberty of individuals to grow and develop. Our conditions of time and place have changed. In the so-called “data-driven” society we have become, we now possess the technology to assess the consequences of political action more scientifically. A principled approach is only right insofar as it is useful — but now that we have the ability to judge the consequences of individual policies more accurately and systematically, we should accordingly adjust our approach to allow the use of such methods to their fullest potential.

51lupivkcel-_sy344_bo1204203200_In particular, the benefits of using statistical methods and mathematical modeling seem clear. Such groups as “Moneyball for Government”  seek to “stop spending dollars on programs that aren’t getting results” by using such methods. This group advocates the “use [of] data and evidence to continuously improve quality and impact, while also reducing duplication and cutting red tape that can strangle new ideas,” and seeks to “focus on outcomes and lives changed, rather than simply compliance and numbers served.” These more rigorous and experimental methods will allow us to try several compelling policies, quantitatively assess the results of each, and choose the most effective program.

Another example is seen with the article “Modelling a Basic Income with Python and Monte Carlo Simulation,” which gives a simple demonstration of how mathematical and computational methods can be used to gain informational leverage on economic policy decisions. Certainly, such techniques are used today by many holding or seeking political power when making political and especially economic decisions. What I advocate is that the scope of such methods is expanded into the realm of public discussion, such that most public arguments will be quantitative and based on scientific rigor, rather than the current state of public argument, which is at argument from ethical principles and at worst pure sophistry. Though the domain of applying these statistical methods to politics is still yet an inchoate science, I expect the domain to rightly grow in influence on public debate and policy decision.

No doubt there will remain much argument to be had about the creation and assessment of such models, but this discussion will be more rigorous and scientific. I believe this is the most scientific and thus the most effective means currently available to us for assessment of and decisions about political action. Use of these methods will enable us to judge which policy is most likely to promote individuals’ liberty of development most efficiently.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dewey