 |
 |
|||||
| MAIN PAGE | Individual Rights and Civil Order |
Trade and the Economy |
Domestic Ills | Foreign Affairs | Omissions | |
Articles Written In Reference To The Reformat Project.
What It Is and What It Isn't | G.Squyres |
| 22 July 2003 | |
 This will be the first of a number of reports from the Platform Special Committee on the Platform reformatting project. The process has been underway for some time, each of the committee members having been assigned three planks from the platform for reformatting posting to the committee. Three planks are posted per week, the committee then having one week to review the assignments of the language to the four categories and to suggest additional language where the reformatting has obviated deficiencies. Once the committee has given its input, the reformatted plank will be posted to the Platform Reformat website so that the membership at large can review the initial reformatting, give feedback and offer suggestions. The feedback from the membership will then be forwarded for consideration by the committee and the specific member that reformatted the given plank for which feedback has been offered. All of this will take place online with a final reformatted platform available online.
This all depends however on the reformatting project being clearly understood as to what it is and is not doing, and there has been considerable confusion since the convention in Indianapolis as to exactly what the project entails. Many have understood the project to be a wholesale rewriting of the platform; others have thought it a complete discarding of the platform or a substituting of the Executive Summary. Still others believe that the reformatting will entail throwing out some planks and adding others. None of these are correct. Substituting more, less or different words, from today=92s or tomorrow=92s writers without a substantive change in the formal requirements we impose on the platform=92s planks will not permanently transform a platform that many have called emotional Libertarian verbal diarrhea.
The correct understanding of what the reformatting amounts to results from seeing the rigorous and logical format requirements that we wish to impose on any present and future planks. In ten years issues will arise that will require a future platform committee to write new planks to address those issues; what would we want that committee to be required to do in order to write a good plank? If their job is merely to come up with a page full of language that is more rant and emotion than substance and logic, they will not produce anything less vulnerable to the current criticisms and faults. If instead that committee has a rigorous format that they must follow in the writing of any plank, a format that requires a clear statement of the issue, a correct and logical application of Libertarian principle to the issue, along with the solutions and ultimate vision of the Libertarian world which our principles lead to, as well as an intelligent plan of the steps we will take to arrive at those solutions, then and only then will they produce a platform that does the job of presenting the Libertarian position, without controversy or vulnerability.
The reformatting project will not in itself produce any new language. Rather it will take the existing language and determine in which of the four logical categories, Issue, Principle, Solution or Transition, does the language correctly belong. The individual sentences will be assigned to one of these four depending on the function that sentence most closely performs. Once all language has been placed into its correct category, a number of things will become obvious. First we will quickly see whether or not there is current language to do all four of the jobs required. We have already seen planks where there is no language that states the issue. We have seen planks where there is only a picture of a Libertarian world, yet no practical steps showing how we would get there. Second we will see how well the existing language serves the function it is purported to serve. Much of the language we have is emotional ranting or complaining, rather than concisely doing the job it is supposed to do. It is such language that causes many of our members to bemoan a platform that is verbose, boring and a cure for insomnia.
The Issue: It is the lack of properly stating the drug issue that allows a Republican shill to stand up and scream at one of our candidates,93You people want to legalize heroin!=94 The issue is not that we advocate drug usage; but the current language leads those outside the party to believe that we do, and leaves our candidates vulnerable to attack. Correctly framed, the issue is that Prohibition never stopped anyone from drinking alcohol, it only created Al Capone. It also led to tremendous government power, abuse and expense. Properly framing the issue allows Libertarians to control the debate.
Principle: If we are to be the party of principle, then we must not only be able to state that principle clearly, but we must also be able to show anyone, a tradesman or a CEO, exactly how that principle applies to a particular issue. It is no good to merely hold up our principles as what distinguishes us from other political parties. We have to be able to deliver that principle on any given issue, in a realistic way that ordinary people can relate to and believe in. And we must do this in a very few, but effective, words.
Solutions: Many have claimed that our platform has been watered down and no longer allows the radical Libertarian picture of the beautiful world that we see and seek. They rightly claim that the reason the socialists have made such progress over the years is that they have continually held high their vision of the world. When we clearly, concisely state our solutions to correctly framed issues, as the destination we seek, as a clear cut picture of the Libertarian world we envision, we don=92t water down our vision but hold it high for the world to follow.
Transitions: Many have complained that we only talk about what is wrong rather than show the way to get to what is right. They hold up the successes and achievements that Libertarians have already enjoyed, and with justification demand that our platform show the steps to get to our vision, and the steps we have already succeeded in taking. The transition section is where we stand up and show the first step towards the better world we see, the direction we want to go, and the steps we have already taken.
Only after we have placed the existing language into its correct place, and found either empty categories in the format or language that either performs none of the required functions, or performs them badly, will we endeavor to present any suggested language or substitutions. Three columns will present first the existing plank; second, the reformatted plank; third any suggested changes or additions. But, now that the task is clear, creating language will not be the rambling emotional operation of the past but a concise, insightful solution to a clearly recognized set of requirements.
| |
