I respectfully reject Dani's populist representative for the reason Matt cited and others.
I also reject Matt's leadership by vision due to the assumption of benevolence being inherent which it isn't.
Both are white males and there is deep white, male priviledge embedded in both these perspectives.
Likewise, "reps with cults" and "leaders as visionaries" are essentially two sides of 1 coin.
IOWs, both can easily lead to might over right, corporate billionaires over average citizens, superstitions over reason and reality, authorianism over free will, and worse.
America is riddled with society wide problems and so what we need is listeners first, people from all walks of life & viewpoints who run for office, willing to bring citizens together, also from all walks of life and viewpoints, who then use their legislative power to address these challenges.
All solutions ought to be crafted by basic principles such as:
1) Harm reduction
2) Empowering individuals to choose their best selves & life
I do find it interesting that you were comfortable making assumptions about my identity while criticizing assumptions about privilege. I am a Mexican immigrant from León, Guanajuato, carry a Mexican passport, and grew up in a Spanish-speaking household. I was not raised with the understanding that I had "white privilege," nor was that my lived experience.
What appears to have happened is that you racially misidentified me as white and assumed my opinions were being taken seriously because of perceived white privilege, without realizing I'm Mexican. If that assumption came from my last name, it's worth noting that my mother married a white man and I took his last name.
Sorry I'm not brown enough for you to recognize my heritage, but being Mexican doesn't come with a required appearance.
Regardless, thank you for taking the time to engage with what I wrote.
The most important quality an elected official can have is the ability to read a room. Your best elected officials will be truly representative, while having the ability of leading their constituents to the public objectives they wish to see through.
So many public officials morph into leaders only, instead of representatives of a constituency because those who vote don’t follow through on the demands of citizenship. Far too few constituents attend public meetings or functions where the ways and means of policy get hammered out.
I look at the No Kings Movement and think, “does this movement really have legs? How many people will really show up to demand the justice that must happen, be it for personal or community reasons?”
It’s a lot to unpack and public service is a lot more nuanced than a representative vs. leader argument. If it wasn’t, a lot more people would probably pursue public office.
Dave, absolutely. There is so much nuance and so many distinctions to be made here. I was a political science major in undergrad, and we read books upon books about different styles of representation, leadership, political philosophy, and the practices that go along with them.
You're right. Reading the room is one thing, advocating for your beliefs is another. Sometimes you're fighting uphill, and sometimes you're riding the wave. There's a lot more to it than simply being a representative or a leader.
I just thought it was an interesting conversation between Dani and myself. He wrote an op-ed, and to be honest, I didn't really agree with his argument. That's why I wanted to write a contrasting opinion.
I'm just happy it sparked some conversation and got people thinking about what elected officials should be and what we should expect from them.
I respectfully reject Dani's populist representative for the reason Matt cited and others.
I also reject Matt's leadership by vision due to the assumption of benevolence being inherent which it isn't.
Both are white males and there is deep white, male priviledge embedded in both these perspectives.
Likewise, "reps with cults" and "leaders as visionaries" are essentially two sides of 1 coin.
IOWs, both can easily lead to might over right, corporate billionaires over average citizens, superstitions over reason and reality, authorianism over free will, and worse.
America is riddled with society wide problems and so what we need is listeners first, people from all walks of life & viewpoints who run for office, willing to bring citizens together, also from all walks of life and viewpoints, who then use their legislative power to address these challenges.
All solutions ought to be crafted by basic principles such as:
1) Harm reduction
2) Empowering individuals to choose their best selves & life
3) Abundance not scarcity
4) People over obscene profit
5) The common good
6) Inclusion
7) Reality / reason
8) No silver bullets
9) ....
10) .....
Also not white btw. So…. Yeah. But thanks for reading.
Thank you for your comment and for reading.
I do find it interesting that you were comfortable making assumptions about my identity while criticizing assumptions about privilege. I am a Mexican immigrant from León, Guanajuato, carry a Mexican passport, and grew up in a Spanish-speaking household. I was not raised with the understanding that I had "white privilege," nor was that my lived experience.
What appears to have happened is that you racially misidentified me as white and assumed my opinions were being taken seriously because of perceived white privilege, without realizing I'm Mexican. If that assumption came from my last name, it's worth noting that my mother married a white man and I took his last name.
Sorry I'm not brown enough for you to recognize my heritage, but being Mexican doesn't come with a required appearance.
Regardless, thank you for taking the time to engage with what I wrote.
The most important quality an elected official can have is the ability to read a room. Your best elected officials will be truly representative, while having the ability of leading their constituents to the public objectives they wish to see through.
So many public officials morph into leaders only, instead of representatives of a constituency because those who vote don’t follow through on the demands of citizenship. Far too few constituents attend public meetings or functions where the ways and means of policy get hammered out.
I look at the No Kings Movement and think, “does this movement really have legs? How many people will really show up to demand the justice that must happen, be it for personal or community reasons?”
It’s a lot to unpack and public service is a lot more nuanced than a representative vs. leader argument. If it wasn’t, a lot more people would probably pursue public office.
Dave, absolutely. There is so much nuance and so many distinctions to be made here. I was a political science major in undergrad, and we read books upon books about different styles of representation, leadership, political philosophy, and the practices that go along with them.
You're right. Reading the room is one thing, advocating for your beliefs is another. Sometimes you're fighting uphill, and sometimes you're riding the wave. There's a lot more to it than simply being a representative or a leader.
I just thought it was an interesting conversation between Dani and myself. He wrote an op-ed, and to be honest, I didn't really agree with his argument. That's why I wanted to write a contrasting opinion.
I'm just happy it sparked some conversation and got people thinking about what elected officials should be and what we should expect from them.