It’s problematic to present political operatives with new political language when you’re trying to win a race against an incumbent as an underdog. They’ll look at you and laugh, mainly because politics is a game of familiarity. Still, as a candidate with ideas, this can’t wait.
The divisiveness of our time is one that we have to deal with head on, and most of our leadership (on both sides of the isle) are unwilling to pick at old wounds. The frameworks that are being recommended are, in my opinion, flawed for the 21st Century mainly because of the new and unavoidable tools that we have at our disposal. Tools like, transparency of human activity, as a result of the use of devices to capture our every move and socialize them… Tools like, the lowering of sovereign and economic borders as a result of our digital transaction of both information and capital…
In the 21st Century I think that in order to enjoy the fruits of our distribution of economic and technological innovations, we first have to reconcile with each other over the lack of access people have had socially and politically.
That stated, all ideologies are being branded in line with the 20th Century and triggering dangerously familiar sentiments among our tribes. My candidacy and life’s work is involved with providing common way forward that acknowledges the common ground that we may never stand on.
Inclusionism is based on 3 rigid principals:
- All people have intrinsic value.
- All people derive their value from interaction with others.
- All people should have equity in the value that is created from our interaction.
While much of good legislation is rooted in compromise and it has been the strength of America, I just want you all to know that I am thinking about each problem from this framework. I am optimistic and hopeful that we can work together if we are able to include more people in the workings and equity derived from our experiment at a great society.