{"id":13839,"date":"2020-02-06T12:55:21","date_gmt":"2020-02-06T20:55:21","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/?p=13839"},"modified":"2020-02-06T12:55:30","modified_gmt":"2020-02-06T20:55:30","slug":"iowa-wasnt-a-technology-failure-it-was-a-failure-of-democratic-values","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2020\/02\/06\/iowa-wasnt-a-technology-failure-it-was-a-failure-of-democratic-values\/","title":{"rendered":"Iowa Wasn’t a Technology Failure. It Was a Failure of Democratic Values."},"content":{"rendered":"\n

February 04, 2020 by Common Dreams<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This kind of behavior undercuts the Democratic Party politically. To put it in today’s corporatized vocabulary, “democracy” is the party\u2019’s brand\u2014and lately they’ve been trashing it.<\/h4>\n\n\n\n

by Richard Eskow<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

 36 Comments<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Troy<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Troy Price, Chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, addresses the media about the delayed results from last night’s Iowa caucus at the Iowa Events Center on February 04, 2020 in Des Moines, Iowa. from last night’s Iowa caucus at the Iowa Events Center on February 04, 2020 in Des Moines, Iowa. (Photo: Scott Olson\/Getty Images)<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

What we saw at the Democratic Party\u2019s Iowa caucuses wasn\u2019t a failure of technology. It was a failure of values.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This failure casts a shadow on the party\u2019s ability to carry out its basic responsibilities. Worse, it suggests that its leaders care more about helping their friends than serving the public interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s no exaggeration to call this a crisis of legitimacy. Like the GOP, the Democratic Party holds a position that is unique among democracies. It is, in effect, one half of a state-sponsored duopoly that controls electoral politics. That kind of unaccountable power is detrimental to democracy. As long as it exists, however, it confer an obligation to serve the interests of democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Republicans have made it clear they couldn\u2019t care less. But the GOP\u2019s abdication places an even heavier burden on Democrats to uphold basic democratic standards: by rejecting cronyism and oligarchy, promoting transparency, and ensuring that every person\u2019s vote counts. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

They failed to uphold this burden in Iowa, and not for the first time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This kind of behavior undercuts Democrats politically. To put it in today\u2019s corporatized vocabulary, \u201cdemocracy\u201d is the party\u2019s brand\u2014and lately they\u2019ve been trashing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shadow Play<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On its face, the level of incompetence leading up to the Iowa fiasco seems almost incomprehensible.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, a party that has spent the last three years talking about data hacking took a manual process and shifted it onto on one of the most hackable devices in the world: a cell phone.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Then, having created a vulnerability where there had been none, it spent more money protecting itself from this self-created vulnerability.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The technology in question was then rushed into production without proper training for its users, when the stakes for democracy were high\u2014and the whole world was watching.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Crazy, right? Actually, no.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It all makes perfect sense\u2014once you realized that the software was only a secondary concern for the people involved. Max Blumenthal<\/a> reports that Shadow Inc, the software company that produced the app, had ties to the Buttigieg campaign both as a contractor and (through its top funder) as a donor. ( \u201cShadow Inc\u201d? Really? Were all the best evil names taken, like \u201cSpectre\u201d and \u201cHydra?\u201d)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Shadow Inc\u2019s website says that its employees are veterans of the Clinton and Obama campaigns, as well as the DNC\u2014although, like the Men in Black, it refuses to identify its operatives by name. This reinforces the sense of an insider clique with an interest in the caucus results, rather than a team of the most qualified tech experts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Blumenthal observes, \u201cthe conspiracy theories write themselves.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The technology failed, but the deal-making worked just fine. Its underlying purpose wasn\u2019t to produce an app, or any other product. The deal was the product. The app was merely the residue of an agreed-upon cash transfer among insiders. Its functionality was a secondary concern.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Machine Failure<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Not that this was necessarily a conscious choice. I keep hearing that many of the people involved in these deals are good folks: nice, decent, friendly, likable. I don\u2019t doubt it. You can be all those things and still be part of a culture with misguided priorities and broken values. But the longer you\u2019re part of that culture, the more likely you are to lose sight of your own basic values\u2014or, worse, to delude yourself into thinking you\u2019re still living by them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nice or not, they take care of their own. What else explains Iowa\u2019s hiring of Robby Mook, the manager of Hillary Clinton\u2019s failed 2016 campaign, as a cyber security consultant? Mook is widely considered one of the nice guys (I\u2019ve never met him). But his flawed data analysis is seen as playing a major role in her loss. Later, he even misattributed the actions<\/a> of Macedonian teenagers to Russian government operatives. That doesn\u2019t suggest an excess of cybersecurity talent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That, too, is secondary. The party establishment runs itself as a private fiefdom, one whose primary purpose is to take care of its centrist allies.  Think of it as a Jobs Guarantee for people who are against a Jobs Guarantee for anyone else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Democrats may present themselves as the party of meritocracy\u2014a neoliberal notion that can be found in its longstanding rhetoric about a \u201clevel playing field\u201d and \u201cgiving everyone a fair chance.\u201d Within the party itself, however, merit often takes a backseat to connections and cronyism. The centrist Democratic belief that competition breeds excellence\u2014a variant of what Thomas Frank called \u201cthe ideology of professionalism\u201d\u2014doesn\u2019t seem to apply to its own operations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sure, most political machines take care of their own. But even the most corrupt, like Boss Tweed\u2019s in New York, also managed to do things with at least a modicum of efficiency. If you handed your alderman a few bucks and told him the sewers on your street needed fixing, he\u2019d take your money. But the sewers would get fixed. This machine takes your cash and hires consultants.  Maybe the sewers get fixed, maybe not. It doesn\u2019t matter much either way, as long as the right people get the gig.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That\u2019s why so many Democratic campaign managers run one failed campaign after another, and keep getting hired anyway. There\u2019s nothing wrong with letting consultants make a decent living (as long as they don\u2019t get greedy and make millions doing ad buys). But shouldn\u2019t they earn these important jobs with a record of accomplishment?  Where\u2019s that \u201clevel playing field\u201d we\u2019ve heard so much about?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Worst Worst-Case Scenario<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The New York Times<\/a><\/em> reported last month that Mook\u2019s firm ran a \u201cdrill of worst-case scenarios\u201d on cybersecurity for Iowa\u2019s Democratic and Republican parties. \u201cWe ran them through the ringer and pushed them really hard,\u201d Mook was quoted as saying.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By consulting on cybersecurity threats, Mook was cashing in on a wave of exaggerated fear he played an major role<\/a> in creating.  And while everyone focused on cybersecurity, the Democrats neglected basic functionality. Some reports said that party officials didn\u2019t even want anyone to download the app or be trained on it until the very last minute, because they were so worried about interference<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That seems like a metaphor for the last three years: Democrats focused on outside threats while overlooking their own job duties.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It\u2019s not that they\u2019re indifferent to those duties\u2014like winning elections, or crafting policies that serve the majority\u2019s interests. On balance, most insiders would undoubtedly prefer winning to losing. And they\u2019d probably rather accomplish good things for the electorate than not. It\u2019s not that they\u2019re indifferent to these things. They just don\u2019t let them interfere with their self-interest.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Democratic activist Nomiki Konst, who knows a lot about the party\u2019s operations, tweeted<\/a> that \u201cAll roads lead to budget oversight and conflicts of interest\u2026 Who signed the contract for this app? And what bidding was there?\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

She\u2019s right, and rules changes<\/a> like the ones she proposes are urgently needed. But that\u2019s only part of the solution. The Democratic Party must confront this crisis of legitimacy by changing an insider culture that serves it, and the public interest, poorly. If it doesn\u2019t do that, and soon, the result may well be another victory for Trump and his party.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They may deserve that, but we don\u2019t.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Originally published at www.patreon.com\/thezerohour<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Richard<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Richard (RJ) Eskow<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0is Senior Advisor for Health and Economic Justice at\u00a0Social Security Works<\/a>\u00a0and the host of\u00a0The Zero Hour with RJ Eskow<\/a>\u00a0on Free Speech TV. Follow him on Twitter:\u00a0@rjeskow\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

February 04, 2020 by Common Dreams This kind of behavior undercuts the Democratic Party politically. To put it in today’s corporatized vocabulary, “democracy” is the party\u2019’s brand\u2014and lately they’ve been trashing it. by Richard Eskow  36 Comments Troy Price, Chairman of the Iowa Democratic Party, addresses the media about the delayed… Continue reading → <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13839"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13839"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13839\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13841,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13839\/revisions\/13841"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13839"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13839"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13839"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}