Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learningfrom the world's big
thinkers
How #Unity2020 plans to end the two-party system, bring back Andrew Yang
The proposal calls for the American public to draft two candidates to lead the executive branch: one from the center-left, the other from the center-right.
02 July, 2020
Photo by David Becker/Getty Images
- The #Unity2020 plan was recently outlined by Bret Weinstein, a former biology professor, on the Joe Rogan Experience.
- Weinstein suggested an independent ticket for the 2020 presidential election: Andrew Yang and former U.S. Navy Admiral William McRaven.
- Although details of the proposal are sparse, surveys suggest that many Americans are cynical and frustrated with the two-party system.
<p>Americans are rigidly divided on many issues, but the idea that national politics is corrupt is not one of them. In recent years, <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/244094/majority-say-third-party-needed.aspx" target="_blank">surveys</a> on Americans' views on political corruption and their trust in the federal government reveal that cynicism stretches across both parties, even though <a href="https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/04/25/voters_rate_political_corruption_as_americas_biggest_crisis_140156.html" target="_blank">diagnoses may differ</a>.<br></p><p>This widespread frustration has a logical consequence: <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/195920/americans-desire-third-party-persists-election-year.aspx" target="_blank">distrust of the two-party system</a>. And now, Americans face an upcoming presidential election between, arguably, the most controversial president in history, and a challenger whose chief selling point is: who he is not. </p><p>Is there a way out? Consider Unity2020 — a proposal for a new format of federal governance that aims to replace cynicism and partisanship with compromise and cooperation. </p><p>The <a href="https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336" target="_blank">proposal</a> is spearheaded by Bret Weinstein, a biologist, evolutionary theorist and cultural commentator associated with the Intellectual Dark Web. Weinstein made headlines in 2017 after <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/01/opinion/when-the-left-turns-on-its-own.html" target="_blank">criticizing the demands</a> of student protesters at Evergreen State College, where he was formerly a professor of biology.</p>
<div id="9e158" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="63f950051e6bd3b9389dd650479f3589"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1278511477570166784" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#Unity2020 is perhaps the most important political development in decades. It is urgently needed. The Exhausted Maj… https://t.co/Cn8X8jhx5J</div> — Brendan from Dharma (@Brendan from Dharma)<a href="https://twitter.com/brendan_dharma/statuses/1278511477570166784">1593655864.0</a></blockquote></div><p>Here's how the Unity2020 plan would work, according to a Medium <a href="https://medium.com/@ArticlesOfUnity/the-articles-of-unity-f544f930d336" target="_blank">post</a> titled "The Articles of Unity":</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"We the people draft two candidates: one from the center-left, one from the center-right. Once elected, they agree to govern as a team. All decisions and appointments will be made jointly in the interests of the American public. Only when they cannot reach agreement, or when a decision does not allow for consultation, does the President decide independently. A coin flip determines which candidate runs at the top of the ticket."</p><p>Each candidate must possess three qualities:</p><ol><li>They must be patriotic</li><li>They must be highly capable</li><li>They must be courageous</li></ol><p>The post doesn't mention how these qualities would be defined, or who would judge prospective candidates.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"After four years in office, the order reverses for the next election," the post reads. "This continues until the American public chooses an alternative administration or one of the members of the team cannot run for re-election, at which point a new patriot would replace them."</p>
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="32de3db8c3344a17afcc9d7589ac5456"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pRCzZp1J0v0?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span><p>Who would fit the bill? On a recent <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRCzZp1J0v0&t=9413s" target="_blank">episode</a> of the Joe Rogan Experience, Weinstein suggested two potential center-ish draftees: former 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Andrew Yang, and retired U.S. Navy Admiral William Harry McRaven, who oversaw the special operations raid that killed Osama Bin Laden.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"Here we got two people, one of them, I think, will do so out of duty, the other one is crazy enough to want the job in the first place. And what are they? Well, they're both patriots, they're both courageous, and they're both highly capable. This is the road out."</p><p>Of course, many questions remain: How exactly would Americans go about drafting the two candidates? Do Americans actually want a coalition of two centrists? And are we really going to rely on a coin flip to determine who leads the executive branch for four years?</p>
<p>Logistical questions aside, the overall sentiment of the plan is something with which many Americans would likely agree.</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"The need for leadership has never been greater. Yet, the parties have never offered less."</p><p>The post continues:</p><p style="margin-left: 20px;">"We will not settle for the false choice presented to us. We demand better, in no uncertain terms. We propose a solution to unify our country such that it may deliver on its immense promise. We intend to use the available tools of American democracy in a new and galvanizing way. We are keenly aware of the full history of American third parties; we will not be a spoiler or be relegated to a footnote. We fully intend to seat an administration that represents the interests of a clear and overwhelming majority of Americans."</p>If you want to get involved with Unity2020, check out this Change.org <a href="https://www.change.org/p/american-citizens-draft-andrew-yang-admiral-william-mcraven-for-a-2020-independent-ticket-unity2020?original_footer_petition_id=20691936&algorithm=promoted&source_location=petition_footer&grid_position=8&pt=AVBldGl0aW9uALTvXQEAAAAAXvpQ7IFx%2B9szMzViZjYzZA%3D%3D" target="_blank">petition</a> that aims to put Yang and McRaven on a 2020 independent ticket.
Keep reading
Show less
Why demonizing Trump supporters destroys democracy
There are ways to engage with someone with whom you don't agree.
13 May, 2020
- When you have pre-conceived ideas about a group whose views oppose your own, you risk closing the door to meaningful discourse before it begins.
- "When you demonize those who voted against you then there's no chance of a democratic debate," argues Yanis Varoufakis, former finance minister of Greece and founder of DiEM25. "You've lost it completely. Then you go into a state of civil war."
- Varoufakis says that there are two ways of approaching a difference of opinion: external and internal critiques. Focusing on internal critiques as the more fruitful method, Varoufakis explains how using logic to work through one's assumptions to see if they lead to the same conclusions can open up a pathway to conversation.
<p class="media-headline"><br></p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="1c80e7cddc37be840050911200a4062a" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0374538050?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51cXxCetI9L.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">Adults in the Room: My Battle with the European and American Deep Establishment</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0374538050?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$9.89</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$9.89</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$4.71</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p><br></p>
Keep reading
Show less
Be a better leader: Knowing the dangers of ‘yes men’
If you're right all the time, you're probably doing something wrong.
18 April, 2020
- One of the potential dangers of being a successful leader is that the people around you stop challenging your decisions, no matter how bad or wrong they may be.
- Asserting dominance and establishing negative consequences for those who challenge your authority (such as firing or reprimanding offenders) only exacerbates the problem and adds to the toxic culture of unchecked power.
- Astronaut Garrett Reisman argues that while it's natural to want to be told that you're smart and right, it's important that good leaders cultivate a work environment where their team isn't afraid to speak up.
Keep reading
Show less
Fighting racism: This is the biggest mistake people make
Voices of color are necessary for understanding racism, but it should be on their terms.
17 April, 2020
- Topics of race and racism are often uncomfortable, especially for the people of color being pressured to share sensitive and vulnerable information.
- While some people of color have chosen to educate others on what racism looks like and how to fight it, not all people of color should be expected to. Writer and consultant Robin DiAngelo argues that the onus is on white people to seek the information being offered, not to try and extract it.
- As a white person, DiAngelo acknowledges that her voice "cannot be the only voice" and that voices of color are necessary to reach understanding.
<p class="media-headline"><br></p>
<div class="rm-shortcode amazon-assets-widget" data-rm-shortcode-id="4f3499a83f091d82c4c0356feff8c49b" contenteditable="false">
<a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0807047414?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">
<img src="https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/51x-m+9MYPL.jpg" class="amazon-assets-widget__image">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__description">
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__title" style="display: block;">White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism</div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__by-amazon"><!-- <a href="https://www.amazon.com/dp/0807047414?tag=bigthink00-20&linkCode=ogi&th=1&psc=1" target="_blank">by now at amazone</a> --></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__list-price"><span class="grey">List Price: </span><span class="list-price">$12.19</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__new-price"><span class="grey">New From: </span><span class="new-price">$10.89</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
<div class="amazon-assets-widget__used-price"><span class="grey">Used From: </span><span class="used-price">$13.01</span> <span class="grey">in Stock</span></div>
</div>
</a>
</div>
<p><br></p>
Keep reading
Show less
How does intellectual humility unlock greater knowledge?
Practicing Socratic ignorance, or avoiding certainty of our own knowledge, diminishes inequality and pushes us in our search for wisdom.
15 April, 2020
- Classical liberalist thinking is based on the fundamental notion that we're all equal as citizens within our governmental order. This thought lends itself to the specific principle of intellectual humility.
- Senior Program Officer at the Institute for Humane Studies, Bradley Jackson provides the definition of intellectual humility as recognition that we have imperfect knowledge of the world. If each of us remains intellectually humble, this levels us as equals.
- Putting this into practice calls for a level of social trust, and maintaining this liberal democracy requires that we view each other as equals in these moral and political ways.
Popular
