Dear Citizenship Politics Reader,
I’m encouraging you to be a paid subscriber to Citizenship Politics, where I try to provide reliable information and analyze political developments. In this effort, I ask what social and institutional forces shape our lives. And what, if anything, should we do to steer it in the right direction?
Your contribution helps me continue to write and expand Citizenship Politics’ reach to new readers. I measure my success primarily by the number of readers rather than revenue. Subscribers entirely support my work; no government, business, or organizational funding is received.
Monetary support can come as a monthly contribution through Patreon or a One-Time Contribution, which has the option of an Offline Check directly to me or through PayPal.
No matter whether you can afford or care to contribute, please share a piece that you like with others who may appreciate reading it.
I am also using this email to explain why I write Citizenship Politics, what my work involves, and how I ended up here.
Why I write CP
I write Citizenship Politics to encourage readers to think of themselves as “citizens” of a democratic republic. I believe being a citizen is more than a legal term; it is defined by respecting the democratic process for creating laws and protecting our right to “pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” as stated in our Declaration of Independence.
Interestingly, an alternative phrase, “life, liberty, and property,” is found in the Declaration of Colonial Rights, a resolution of the First Continental Congress. However, the writers of our final Declaration of Independence went with “the pursuit of happiness,” not “property” or “estate,” the latter of which is found in Jefferson’s first draft. The selection of the final wording strongly implies that happiness is more than possessing property; it is about securing our overall welfare.
I try to provide reliable information and analyze political developments. In this effort, I ask what social and institutional forces shape our lives. And what, if anything, should we do to steer it in the right direction?
Rational discussions are necessary to understand, explain, and respond to our republic’s challenges. Consequently, I want an audience that would like to dig deeper into a topic.
With that approach, about two-thirds of my readers are sociology, political science, and communications academics. The rest are journalists from across the spectrum, non-profit workers, Democratic Party members, and those who have been reading my newsletters from the 18 years I served on the Seattle City Council.
I’ve noticed from reading an extensive array of writers, from right, center, and left views on the internet and in print, that few take a historical or international comparative perspective. I try to include those elements.
A historical perspective creates a context for the challenges we face. Examples of my prior CPs taking that approach are in Extremism of Student Protests Today and in the ’60s and Why did the Parties Switch as Conservative & Liberal?
I compared how other democratic republics struggle with similar problems; I wrote about how voters rejected moderate European governments at the polls in Surging Immigration has led to right-wing governments.
In South America, I showed how the progressive, popular Chilean President Gabriel Boric presented a sweeping and detailed new constitution for a public vote. It was overwhelmingly rejected by 62% of the voters in How could citizens reject a perfectly progressive constitution?
What is my work
Newspapers do not print CPs because it is first released to my subscribers. In addition, they are longer than the average length of an opinion column. The current trend in the plethora of commentaries posted on social media and platforms like Medium and Substack is to push a strong position, which often ignores exploring the complexity of an issue.
Covering a topic requires more space to dig into it, so my pieces have averaged 1,800 words for a total of 42,000 words in 2024, including my last issue, Trump uses 3 Jacksonian Strategies: Define Citizenship, Use the Military, Hire Loyalists.
Consequently, I’m trying to build a community of readers who appreciate reading pieces with a more reflective approach to evaluating our political environment.
I started writing my original newsletter, Urban Politics, in 1998 during my first term of five on the Seattle City Council. I renamed it Citizenship Politics a couple of years after I left the council to reflect its broader national coverage. Readership has gone from 1,600 while on the council to over 10,000 in the last two years.
I only write two pieces monthly because I’m a slow reader, writer, and editor. However, based on the editing suggestions I receive from readers, I could take more time to edit. I review anywhere from a dozen to three dozen articles on a particular topic to see how conflicting opinions are expressed. That effort results in collecting information that no other single piece ties together.
I also enjoy seeing how assumptions are repeated without being challenged. For instance, it was initially thought that the folks attacking Congress on January 6, 2020, could be easily identified by some common characteristic. However, analyses revealed an unexpected conclusion: The inspired terrorists who invaded the Capitol were your neighbors!
Likewise, Democrat activists have campaigned to eliminate the filibuster as only a reactionary tool, but that isn’t so; Democrats Say Eliminate the Filibuster – but they use it more than the Republicans.
Meanwhile, for decades, Republicans accused the Supreme Court of being too liberal. Nevertheless, Democrats have been a minority on the Supreme Court since 1970.
These are just a few examples of why it is necessary to question all authorities, whether government, media, business, or any group that makes assertions. Questioning is not to complain or rant but to open the door for discussing why we should accept something as reliable. By being more accountable, all organizations will grow stronger.
I believe my open rate shows that I’m succeeding in growing a community of interested readers who want to consider how to sustain our democratic republic through thoughtful citizen participation. Of my 24 issues of CP released in 2024, not one had a unique open rate of less than 50%. A unique opening is how many individuals opened it; it does not count how many times a CP was opened.
Only five issues had an open rate below 60%, while eight were above 70%. Readers are engaged. They read and send me their comments, and I try to reply to all of them.
How did I end up here?
Since I was 10, I’ve been writing newsletters, which was a stretch for me since I was dyslexic and couldn’t read until I was nine. I started with the Astronomers’ Club, and forty-one years later, I was writing Urban Politics and have written three published books.
Throughout this journey, I’ve consistently recognized a connection between culture and politics. I see culture as the waters we swim in. It has many different currents; it has swift currents, stagnant tide pools, and whirlpools that can suck us down.
I see politics as the boats we occupy that navigate these waters; some are as simple as a raft barely able to hold a family, and others are ocean cruisers that break huge waves and create wakes that reach further than the eye can see.
We all do what we can to help keep our nation afloat. Among the many needed tasks, I’ve found myself as an observer of the horizon, trying to spot developing storms or the safety of a peaceful bay to keep our boat on course.
On this journey, I’ve commented on cultural gatherings that diverged from mainstream culture. I’ve attended some popular ones (What happened at Woodstock? ) and some unconventional ones ( The Strange Tale of a Paradise Lost ). But all created social currents that affected our society and our politics.
I hope Citizenship Politics allows us to consider solutions we hadn’t expected to find. For example, I was surprised when I visited a small midwestern college and found that a philosophy class was reading one of my pieces.
The professor used it to illustrate how to view change in the world. It was a small article that reflected my living experience ( Every Politician Should Live in a Commune). You never know what others will find to introduce a new perspective they have yet to consider. Being open to this opportunity results from a culture that encourages the free exchange of ideas.
I hope Citizenship Politics serves that purpose for you and prompts you to share it with others. This ends what is probably the longest request you will receive this season to solicit a donation.
Take care,
Nick
Photo by Dan Lamont, https://www.linkedin.com/in/lamontdan/ Multimedia Producer, Content Consultant, Editor, Visual and Text Journalist
