Dear Colbert King - Why Talk About DC City "All Democratic Primary" Domination But Not The Results On The Streets?

Washington Post - Colbert I King: One-party system fails D.C.

As the theory goes - I - a known critic of the inside game that the Democratic Party plays within "The Black Community Development Consciousness" should be happy that progressive journalist Colbert King has criticized the "One Party Rule" system in Washington DC (and Philadelphia and Newark and Chicago and Atlanta and Memphis and Milwaukee).

I am not impressed with this purported expose' which calls for a change in the party primary voting system where only registered Democrats are allowed to vote in what amounts to be "The General Election".  (Or as I call it "The Black Community's General Election).  Mr King suggests that in not allowing non-Democrats to participate in the selection of leadership ultimately disenfranchises turns off non-Democrats from participating for change in a system they believe is stacked against them.

The key problem with Mr King's argument is that he fails to make note of the failed promise that the city of Washington DC represents in the "permanent interests" of so many of the people who believe that they will receive community salvation via politics.

How can anyone stand at the point that is about 50 years after the "grand urban promise" that progressivism has offered for reform among "The Least Of These" and not use this point as a time to inspect what was purchased after so much toil?  

What better index for success is there than the condition OF THE PEOPLE?   Instead Mr King chooses to take a swipe at the Democratic machine that merely has proven that it too is capable of erecting monopolies to protect its own interests, little different than a "Republican redistricting scheme" or a corporate retail pricing scheme which seeks to purge a competitor out of a market.

It is clear that it is very unlikely to get a press operative that played such an important role in building up the present establishment power to begin to argue that it has "gone too far", having built up a powerbase while failing to deliver upon what it promised to obtain this power.   I do not expect Mr King and others to become stalwart critics or opponents of this establishment machine.

The problem with this disposition is that the most committed communities in Washington DC are the people who need the most protection from the press overlay.

It would be more fitting if Mr King were to use the DC Public Schools as a specimen to review how "The Government As A Jobs Program" often leads to a situation where "the jobs" are made more important than the quality of the services that the given civic service entity was created to deliver in the first place.

Without claiming to be an expert on the intricacies of DC politics it was clear to the average outsider that the previous mayor and his school chancellor were tossed out of power partially because they dared to upset the labor interests that were more content with going through the motions on school reform rather than sublimating their interests to the goal of producing an efficient academic environment for the children of this long struggling school system.

IF in fact a corporate monopoly has measurable impact on those without power to work around it - why is it that Mr King can't bring himself to talk as directly about how the machine in Washington DC (and other "Mission Accomplished Cities") continue to rake in the vote from the most vulnerable yet remain unchallenged as they fail to deliver upon their promises?

The solution that Mr King should consider is the shift in messaging among "The Least Of These" from the proposition that political power and activism is going to fix their problems - over to the clear message that GOVERNANCE and coordination of themselves as RESOURCES in the fix - is the only way that they will change their condition.

If there was ever a time to protect the vulnerable from exploitation - the time is now to protect them against THEMSELVES - and what their present consciousness makes them inclined to invest in - despite its failures to develop sufficient competencies within them.