Part of the openDemocracy Network
NavigationThe British Crisis
Do the public really want to change ‘the system’?: Stuart Wilks-Heeg presents polling evidence
Don't trust MPs' constitutional poker: Guy Aitchison supports the call for a citizens' convention
Brown's 'National Council for Democratic Renewal': Anthony Barnett on the Prime Minister's desperate proposal Technorati |
Party animals in Denver25 - 08 - 08
The Nation magazine is doing excellent "unconventional" coverage of the Convention on their website including blog posts, videos, and articles. On this video, festivitas-expert and Nation writer, Ari Berman, explains that lots of the action outside the convention happens outside the main events, and that lobbyists and big companies abound. In this regard, a political Convention in the United States is not dissimilar to the Olympics, as somthing with a higher purpose that is irrisistably good for business. In the clip, Ari introduces The Most Powerful Man in Denver (You've Never Heard Of), a man named Steve Farber who is a lobbyist and chief fundraiser for the Democratic Convention. Obama says he is opposed to special interest funding, but he obviously hasn't been able to change how the entire political machine works overnight. The total budget of the Convention must be astronomical.
The Convention itself is totally scripted, and the predictability is partly what makes it more of a ceremony than a real political conversation. I met one of the speech writers, who says they have a team of writers who will be sitting behind the stage in "the pit" editing and writing politicians' submitted speeches before they go on stage. There are strict time limits they must adhere to, and they must submit their speeches in writing for editing first. I imagine it will be somewhat like the Oscar's except the people coming up to give the speeches won't be as drunk. However, the Convention is making strong 'gestures' towards democracy and inclusion of the American people, which is nice. Unfortunately it seems less a matter of principal, than something that seems good for publicity, given how Obama is currently on the up and up. House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, says in one of the introductory webcasts, that this year's convention is "almost without walls" given how much they will be interacting with the public in Denver and on the internet. I hope once I'm there, my faith in the US political process may be restored, but national politics here generally seem to be more about saying the right thing than doing it. With 5000 delegates and 15,000 members of the press, clearly this whole show is about publicity more than anything. There are so many gross imperfections in the political system that voters simply seem to have come to terms with and lost hope of changing. It's doesn't make it easier that those who could change it, stand to gain by allowing the status quo to persist. But I suppose that is the case mostly everywhere, in all countries. Kanishk Tharoor | Wed, 2008-08-27 10:50 Interesting about the scripted nature of the "spectacle". Todd Gitlin has a good post on the Harpers' blog about how the convention used to be of far greater importance in the past: "Politics everywhere involves pageantry, then. But the United States threw open the gates to special, gaudy adventures in pageantry. It aspired from its inception to democratize the spectacle of power." Those were the conventions of the 19th century and much of the 20th. Now the "spectacle of power" is being commercialised, as you've already noted.
Post new comment |
Recent comments
2 hours 18 min ago
4 hours 35 min ago
10 hours 4 min ago
19 hours 53 min ago
23 hours 16 min ago
1 day 2 hours ago
1 day 3 hours ago
1 day 5 hours ago
1 day 9 hours ago
1 day 12 hours ago