Robert Johnson writes from Florida:

“It was with interest I read the letter from Steve Withers. I have long argued that the two party system denies democracy in many ways that are corrupting, as well as being highly unrepresentative. The need to change the system of electing are representatives is overwhelmingly overdue. The system, unfortunately, is embedded in the Constitution and requires amendments. And who do you suppose controls the voting on amendments? So, that too, is not very democratic.

“However, I do not agree that proportional representation is a satisfying answer, at least by those national systems of which I am aware. While they do get smaller parties some chance of obtaining seats and even sometimes being junior partners in a government, there is (in my opinion) an even better way.

“Yes, we should have a larger House of Representatives. Of course that likely would require a new, bigger building — or would it. With modern communications systems, why do we need everyone in a single building? They should be more easily accessible to the people they represent that to the lobbying folk. We could have one representative per 300,000 people or even less. But the real problem is how we elect them. One Representative per geographical location — one, mind you, subject to corrupt practices such as gerrymandering. What if all the Representatives were to run at large in the nation as a whole, with each voter able to vote for just one? …

“What about the Senate? Do we really need a bicameral legislature anymore? What is democratic about giving each state, regardless of size, two senate votes? But if we could — how about the Senators getting elected for seven-year terms with fifteen elected each year — again elected at large in the nation as a whole — by the way, that makes for a nice odd number of Senators.

“Then to make it really work, no one can run for the office for which they were last elected. They could run for another office or sit out a year and run again. This would break us of the re-electing of the incumbent, while not ending the opportunity of legislators to run over and over again. So sorry!”

Daryll Bowles writes from Spain:

“Great to have you back. Just a comment about the whitewash of the Nicola Calipari killing. Are you surprised? Believe me the rest of the world is not. Not any more than they were surprised when the U.S. Army acquitted Gen. Sanchez and co. of having any responsibility in the Iraq torture scandals. This may sell over there amongst the brain dead that support Bush and Rumdum but it is not selling here in Europe for sure.

“You might also inform Laura (I would but I have no possibility of doing so) that today on Spanish TV I saw a woman stoned to death in Afghanistan. Of course, she was cheating on her husband who had left home five years ago, leaving her without any means of support for herself and her children. Women in this part of the world not being allowed to work. Perhaps Nike could set up a plant over there and this would change.”

Ken Chevis writes from Toronto about a TV series that should be shown the U.S.:

“Danny, for your information History Channel (Canada) is presenting three one hour segments of a production titled ‘Torture’, depicting the brutality and depravity inflicted on the prisoners in Guantanamo. Scenes in the presentation, while simulated from a collection of written and verbal interviews, are chilling to the point of being stomach-turning. As I have indicated to you in previous communications, I am ex-military and not faint of heart but had to turn away on numerous occasions. It is indeed unfortunate that most Americans, who are by nature a compassionate and loving people, will not have an opportunity (?) to see what some members of their military and intelligence communities are inflicting on fellow human beings. They would be horrified.”

David Swanson writes about Italy:

“Forgive us, Italy, for we know not what we do. Our news media does not tell us. It is only recently that some of us in the United States were able to read briefly about likely CIA kidnappings on your streets. Employees of our government are apparently snatching people off your streets and shipping them to other countries to be tortured.

“I can open my mouth, Italia, but what can I say?

“We killed the negotiator who got your journalist out of Iraq alive. Then we lied about it.

“What can I say to you, after that? How can I ask you to treat me as a human?

“We have an established practice of killing journalists. We kill our own, and if others raise questions they lose their jobs. How were we to know that it would cause a fuss if we shot at one of yours?

“How were we to know? We need only have spent a few days with you! Decency is alive yet in your Berlusconized terrain.”

SHAREHOLDER DEMOCRACY: GOING, GOING…

The NY Times reports that the Weyerhauser company refused to take questions from the floor at a shareholders’ meeting, with one shareholder escorted from the room when he challenged the policy. Noted the Times’ Gretchen Morgenson:

“It’s a disturbing precedent to abolish the single spontaneous interaction that executives –who, after all are, after all, hired help have with owners every years.” But the Times “balanced” its reproach, adding:

“To be sure companies are not required by law to answer shareholders questions from the floor at annual meetings. AND IT IS CERTAINLY UNDERSTANDABLE THAT COMPANIES WANT TO REIN IN GADFLIES AND DISRUPTIVE QUESTIONERS WHOSE AGENDAS DO NOT MATCH MOST SHAREHOLDERS. “

So much for dissent.

For a more democratic approach to business, see Judith E. Glazer’s challenging new book “Creating We” (Platinum Press). It shows how we can build healthier and better organizations. This books is certainly part of the trend towards more socially responsible business practices that stand in counterpoint to the top-down dictatorial practices of many big companies.

UPCOMING EVENT

Someone named “Carolyn,” from the phony e-mail address of “thompsonn.cc@verizon.net”, sent in a nasty comment on the upcoming screening of “WMD” in Tribeca. Here’s her message and my response:

NOT “LEGITIMATE”?

“Carolyn” wrote:

“WMD and Gallery Viet Nam are not affiliated with the Tribeca Film Festival, April 19-May 1 or represented at Family Day, April 30.

“Visit www.tribecafilmfestival.org for legitimate film viewing times and street fair information.”

My response:

“Who suggested this event was tied to the festival, Carolyn? I didn’t. The Gallery Viet Nam doesn’t. They are a Tribeca community venue marking an important historical date connected to our lives and history, and to the legacy of a war that affected all of us. I was invited to show my film there and I am surprised at your tone suggesting this is not legitimate. Why? Because its not sponsored by American Express?

“This is really offensive. And why isn’t the festival supporting it? I did not imply any association with the festival and neither does the Viet Nam Cafe and Gallery, which has been every supportive to the festival by catering all sorts of events.”

VIETNAM HISTORY

The Vietnam war was not legitimate, either. Here’s the BBC’s online history:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/asia_pac/05/vietnam_war/html/introduction.stm

QUESTION: What happens to the spirit of film festivals when they become big businesses and put control freaks in charge?

Your comments welcome as always: write Dissector@mediachannel.org