Skip to main content
Introduction to the 2018 Virgin Constitutional Convention

Briefly, what is the Virgin Constitutional Convention?
A real convention is a closeted affair with local delegates protecting their accidental borders, ancient customs and power centers. Our Virgin model posits a fictional nation (Franklin21) which has tasked the world’s top minds to create a model fit for modern concepts of rational, popular government.
Designed to spur public dialogue, it’s hoped that international media will follow along as on-line delegates debate subjects like to how to choose and limit representatives, how to maximize substantive discourse while minimizing pandering and methods for preventing control of government by the rich.
It’s hoped that concepts of new institutions and customs will help today’s struggling nations.

Why does the world need a successor to Western or liberal democracy?
When the Soviet Union fell, there was hope that Russia would assume a nurturing popular system. When Desert Spring hit Egypt, there seemed an opening for change. When Chavez died, the world hoped for better outcome in Venezuela.
There is an emerging consensus that things are moving in the wrong direction. You can get a pretty good sense of this by reading recent summaries from Freedom House and the Economist Intelligence Unit. You might also visit books like The Post-American World, Counter-Revolution, A World in Disarray, On Tyranny or The Retreat of Western Liberalism.

What does “virgin” mean?
It means a blank slate. We have a warehouse of knowledge from the past two centuries. That’s both invaluable and a curse. The convention of 1787 didn’t try to clone the House of Lords, but it’s Senate became the H of L West. If you wanted to delay children’s rights to education instead of working in a factory, it was your go-to tool. Ditto worker rights. The popular house tried many times to advance civil rights with H of L West always blocking. You could say that it only failed in its “duty’ thanks to historical accident via bullet. An anti-apartheid Southern president, LBJ, broke the wall.
Virgin means establishing objectives and weighing possibilities. It doesn’t mean starting with parties, legislatures or elections as we know them.

These problems may be evident, but doesn’t the idea of invention neglect the possibility of reform?
It’s true that popular systems have a constant undercurrent pushing reform but, like the design of new auto engines to reduce pollution, success means loss for those who profit from the status quo. Also, invention allows for fundamental change while reform, even if implemented, typically ignores founding assumptions that no longer exist.
For example, the US, system came from a period where nine out of ten lived on farms. There was no public education, few forms of concurrent exchange. If its constitution had been written in 2000 instead of 1787, it might look very different.

Consider just one example of the limits of reform. By 1970 the United States had finished a century where its Congress was typically given low marks by its people. In 1948, for example, Harry Truman won the presidency running against a “Do-Nothing Congress.” A reform effort, Common Cause, (link) enlisted hundreds of thousands in an effort to make the legislature more transparent and campaigns for office less expensive. A half-century later, it costs ten times more to run for office. A recent 11,000 page tax bill was passed unread and un-analyzed. The minority party wasn’t even allowed to enter the design conversation. A sad conclusion seems justified: the institution’s resistance to reform is stronger than the people’s wishes for repair.

What are possible changes that an updated democratic system might employ?
The Virgin Convention will obviously look at the idea of government control by political parties, the dangers presented by singular Executives and election pandering that advantages demagogues. It’s not my place to guess what they’ll come up with, only to give the world’s best minds an opportunity to consider such questions.

How will the Virgin Convention work? The first modern, written constitution took a full summer to complete in a sweaty Philadelphia.
Since the delegates live all over the world, it’s an on-line production. The process might take place over two or three weeks. Currently October of 2018 is the time frame.

In Philadelphia guards were put at the entry and delegates were forbidden to speak out of doors, so that the members could reflectively design. Will the Virgin affair be held in secret?
To the contrary - we want the public to follow along. Success will find newspapers and media discussing offerings and conclusions. If it’s just an academic exercise, it will be ignored and we will have missed an opportunity.

Doesn’t such a reveal of individual thinking open them to public abuse?
Members will assume pen names during the process. This increases candor while protecting them from abuse. Even after the 1787 Philadelphia conclusion, three delegates explained the new system’s advantages under a pseudonym, Publius, for the famous Federalist Papers. The reasoning: Focus on ideas instead of personalities.

Can you give us an idea how a day of the convention might work? Might it reveal a sub-committee’s conclusion or a dialogue between certain members?
Yes to both. We have several approaches to organizing the affair. One is to post a particular subject, like what process will select representatives without relying on propaganda, as today? Another is daily journals from members who summerise the day’s activities or an increasing consensus or roadblock.

The delegates will present a new system for the fictional nation of Franklin21. What does this accomplish?
This puts meat on the bones – makes it more real to those following along. Instead of talking about the difficulty of urban vs. rural, you can visualize the difficulty of Los Angeles working with wilderness tribes near the Arctic Circle. When sustainability is discussed, the widely different conditions of Saskatchewan from Oregon can be used. In sum, it helps the public understand the difficulties of nation building.

Critics will say that Franklin21 is an effort at succession?
It’s just a fiction. But that does raise the important subject of how a future democracy might face splintering. We have several real-world examples now. Does a nation send in forces and arrest instigators, as recently in Spain, or will advanced nations make constitutional allowances? There’s always a contest between stability and collective freedoms.

Who selects the Virgin Constitutional Convention delegates?
An organizing committee is being formed for that purpose. Respected writers are being asked to nominate delegates. Hopefully all continents will participate.

When will the Convention be held?
The date is open – it’s tentatively set for October of 2018.

Who will fund the project?
There will be no problem getting support, but this is not an expensive process. There is so much concern about a 21st century return to the 20th century’s decades of war that many are willing to volunteer services.

So, is the Virgin project an attempt to write a new constitution for the US. or other long-established nations?
No. Its conclusions will be more useful to struggling nations. Autocracy is on the march. Needed are models of moderation that can overcome the “charm” of despotism.

There are roughly a dozen nations with highly rated political systems. Why not just copy those?
There is much to learn from nations like Sweden, Norway, Denmark, etc. But I doubt that Egypt or Venezuela could simply adapt their rich traditions, education and economy. A new kind of democracy might be able to move a nation with poor literacy, economic blight and sectarian violence into a nurturing system. The current practice of establishing parties based on existing differences and holding mass elections has proven problematic.

Maybe as population continues to climb, the best answer isn’t simply democracy, but some hybrid system. China says their system is superior, giving the United States as an example of the failure of the democratic model.
A few decades ago, China was a third-world wreck and its favorite sport the murder of its own people. It deserves a lot of credit for the economic and peaceful progress that it has make. However, China is marshaling facts but fumbling logic.
America’s problems come from its increasingly undemocratic practices. Presidential elections, as Robert A. Dahl has written, fail most basic standards of democratic discourse. Donald Trump didn’t win because he’s a demagogue, he won because a damaged system favors demagogues. The public understands congressional inadequacy: Three-quarters say that it works for deep pockets and narrow interests, not for the general welfare.
US problems don’t prove the demise of liberal systems. Unlike despotic systems, democracies have the capability of healing without violence. A world of healthy systems would mean a decrease in the likelihood of war. A world of despotism will always be a world of wars.

Why use Franklin21 as the focus of the Virgin project? Is this necessary?

The aim is to engage the public as much as possible. Actual geography holding real people brings theory alive. How might a distributed government work? Might F21 have mini-capitals from Hawaii, Alaska or Saskatchewan and all the way to San Diego on the Mexican border?

Why are you the person to run the Virgin project?
I’m only kick-starting it. Once the organizing committee is established – aiming for June – it will be an international effort. I’ve blogged for political invention since 1995. This is my last try to make a difference. Some of my blogs:

If you have questions or would like to nominate someone for the organizing effort, please write to gmail at the user name adultdemocracy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Virgin Constitutional Convention of 2018

  Public faith in US government has plummeted in the past sixty years. There are three common theories for the "failure" of the 1787 Constitution. One says that it was constructed for a different planet. Nine out of ten lived on small farms. Education was for the privileged and communications difficult. Not only did early presidents not "run" for office, they didn't even give campaign speeches. A second view: The 20 th century gamed the 18 th . Party machines, lobbyists writing the actual language of bills and vast armies of election mechanics trained in the fine arts of propaganda & pander – all combined to null Founder assumptions. A third take is that the founding plan steered clear of the defining center – left intact were the vagaries of the independent-minded states. As Thomas Paine hammered in his Rights of Man , the key to a successful system lies in its treatment of the individual. Is the citizen a key actor or is he or sh