Our focus is on the democratic process. We want to encourage everyone--no matter their positions on issues--to participate in the process in a civil and responsible way.
We want the political process broken down into three steps:
1) open and respectful dialogue
2) thoughtful and informed deliberation
3) competent and decisive execution.
The process is so broken, we can't get past step 1 right now. We demand cooperation, productivity and accountability in government in the same way we would demand it of an employee we might hire for a job.
We want local chapters to have the autonomy to figure out their own legislative and electoral priorities. At the national level, we'll make recommendations for direct action on legislation. But they will only be suggestions. We value and celebrate diverse opinions just as we value and celebrate diverse backgrounds. All that is required to be part of this movement is a sincere commitment to participating in, and protecting the democratic process.
We hope that our devotion to the respectful dialogue and informed deliberation catches on, sweeps the nation, and sets an example for our elected leaders. Otherwise, we'll have to let them go, and replace them with leaders who follow these three simple rules.
Comments
STEP 1 IS EASY. HOW ABOUT STEPS 2 & 3?
New member here. My first post under forums essentially asked this question (perhaps in the wrong place, but hopefully I'll get the hang of this). Also, I hope I'm not entering this thread too late for anyone to pay notice of this reply.
Regarding the three steps mentioned above; beyond civil discourse, which is laudable, how do we effectively deliberate (not the same as discuss) and more to the point, how do we make decisions and execute? What will the Coffee Party process be? Are we only trying to cool the rhetoric or are we also interested in formulating rational positions and influencing legislation? I still fail to understand how blogging and coffee shop meetups will lead to effective deliberation and execution as a group.
In my opinion, anything less may be looked upon as quaint, but hardly paradigm changing. I think we need to come up with techniques for harnessing the brainpower that's evident in this group and channeling it in ways that will make a real difference. Even if our membership couldn't reach a strong consensus on a particular issue (a "public option" in health care reform might be a good example), we might at least influence our elected representatives to fairly debate it as opposed to what we all witnessed in the Senate - either outrageous and irrational opposition by one party or cowardly avoidance of the subject by the other.
Just one perhaps far-out example of what I'm looking for - the Spherit tool that we all had to complete as a condition of membership. This is an interesting way to effectively capture and communicate a snapshot of each member's position on issues. What if a tool similar to this could be used in a more dynamic fashion to develop consensus on policy positions within the Coffee Party. Facilitators at each level (local group, regional, national) might aggregate positions, modify the tool questionnaire, and iterate the process until reaching a high level of consensus (or not, if consensus isn't reached), then communicate those consensual statements, backed up by the numbers. Assuming the Coffee Party movement will some day reach some sort of critical mass, might such statements be taken somewhat more seriously by politicians and media than the more strident and non-rational Tea Party approach?
Initial Reaction to the Coffee Party Idea
I just started reading about the Coffee Party ... and it all sounds so refreshingly normal and sane to me. I'm so tired of the current status of political theater, posturing, scoring points on your opponents, demonizing and name calling - (much if it meant only to ENTERTAIN 'your party' and PROVOKE the 'other party'. It's exhausting and maddeningly predictable. So thanks for this coffee party start I hope it works, and I'll try to become more informed about it.
The informed part is the tricky part
Can we identify non-partisan, factual sources that will inform people and repudiate myths and outright lies that pass for facts? We really can't rely on the media to perform this task. It is surprising and discouraging to see how ill-informed the public is in an age when we have virtually unlimited access to information instantaneously. Perhaps even more difficult will be getting people to look for facts and not just those that support a desired outcome.
Can we?
Can we identify what is nonpartisan? Do we know what that is anymore? When looking at everything through this new lens, it is clearer than before how far we have fallen.
Is it possible for people with differing worldviews to see the same thing, at all? That childhood conundrum about whether you and I see the same green when looking at the patch of grass under our feet applies here; while the color is the same, our perceptions may differ. However, it isn't crucial. When we look at our country and its characteristics, if we perceive them differently, well, that is more crucial.
Then, I think our capacity for acceptance is taxed, and we will have to maintain an attitude of transcendence. What do we hold in common; what are our shared values; what are we getting hung up on that we need not, in light of our shared goals?
It is tantalizingly easy to revert to the cultural default: trying to persuade and convince someone who disagrees. That way lies frustration and -- I am afraid -- failure.
It is not clear to me who in this organization is setting the culture.
Woops, Item 1
I ought to have written about Item 1, above.
The question to be addressed is this. If how we comport ourselves is the point, then how will we go about the very first bit: being civil, right here?
To me, being civil means, among other things, an absence of knee-jerk, reactionary, emotion driven hyperbole. When we see it, it is incumbent upon us to notice it and identify it as a part of the process we hope to change on the national scene. How will we do this? How will it be received?
Response to Woops, Item 1
I agree docbets to your comment about the meaning of civility including non-knee jerk reactions. Maybe one way to do this is to find points of agreement in the others discussion even if you will ultimately disagree with them on the final policy outcome. A not very deep example might be: 'yes we need health care reform for several reasons, and I also need to weight that against the inefficiencies of large organizations like the federal government.'
skeptical
I'll be honest here... I'm a bit skeptical of the Coffee Party. I will try to keep an open mind, though... your goals are certainly laudable.
While I have never attended a Tea Party protest, I am sympathetic to many (most?) of their positions on things. And to be blunt, much of what is up on the site seems to be anti-Tea Party as much as anything else.
The first step of the outline above states that the Coffee Party desires "open and respectful dialogue". I would like to ask, therefore, what the Coffee Party's stance is on those pundits, journalists, and elected officials who use the "teabagger" slur to denigrate their political opponents. And, if you do oppose its use as an impediment to "open and respectful dialogue", what steps can be taken to address this?
Response to Skeptical
Dear malclave,
Thank you for the reasonable posting. While I'm not a generally disposed to the Tea Party movements point of view - I agree that the silly slur 'teabaggers' is completely unhelpful and derogatory. The Coffee Party certainly needs to be absolutely vigilant about its public actions and postings to hold any credibility in regards civility and its other goals. It will be interesting to see if the Coffee Party gets any traction - I'm just now investigating it myself.
Neutralize special interests
One of the democratic reforms that can have the most far reaching influence over time is the Fair Elections Now Act HR 1826 which already have 138 co-sponsors. It creates voluntary publicly funded campaigns to help neutralize the influence of special interests.
Perhaps the Coffee Party can best establish itself by promoting an actual and practice reform to the democratic process.
This is the way forward!
I am tremendously excited by this approach to local organizing, which is fundamentally different from many other political groups doing this work. If our problem is a government that only responds to the needs of corporate interests, the solution is small "d" democratic organizing at the community level.
Two Wars going on and nobody knows.
Funny thing is that there is no mention of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on your "Important" topics list?
America spends $13,000,000,000.00 every month for these wars, or $156,000,000,000.00 a year or over $1,000,000,000,000.00 since 2002, and yet it did not even make the list of important topics?
WOW!
Either that money could be completely saved and never spent or re-directed in the USA for Schools, job creation, infrastructure, National debt. pay-off or many other issues, let alone all the service men and women who will return home with catastrophic mental, physical and Spiritual problems, and the titanic cost associated with their needs.
Ending these two failed wars for profit from the Bush/ Cheney regime will be the fastest way to stop the bleeding of American resources, both in lives saved, and money thrown into the bottomless pit of greeed and stupidity.
Http://www.richmonk31.blogspot.com