Request for Startups: News, Jobs, and Democracy

Alternative economic arrangements will not be able to survive under an authoritarian kleptocracy. They'll just be moved out of the way through some form of corruption. Even under the neoliberal order, they were only barely tolerated. Think about what happened with Tessa and direct sales in many states as the mildest precursor to this kind of future.

Whether we like it or not, the country is shifting back towards the 19th century notions of "political economy." These existed in a diminished form under neoliberalism, but were largely swept beside by the triumphalist end of history that reigned. Appeals to fascism and authoritarian communism have already entered the Overton window, so the only option now is to outcompete those explicit political-economic fusions with something new.

Thomas, I've been thinking about this as well. Here are some additional mechanics that could be used to build a "YC" for democratic candidates:

1) 8 week Training Program - an eight-week training program targeted at lawyers, entrepreneurs, and others who are interested in serving as state and federal legislatures. Candidates have their training and expenses paid for, and they learn all of the key things they need to know to win. It's an open process, where people all over the country can apply, and the program becomes prestigious over time, like Echoing Green or YC.

- Public Speaking Training - Social Media Growth Hacking - Fundraising and Donor Management - Policy Issue Training

2) Shared News: A hacker news type site for democratically minded people to share political articles. Builds inbound attention to the accelerator.

3) Blog: Articles about what it is like to become a politician. It features lots of examples and profiles. Shows everyday people they can do it as well. - What does the career path look like for someone who joins the House of Representatives? - How do state senators support themselves?

4) Funder Network: Candidates get introductions to top funders from the state who can help. Each candidate gets a certain amount of intros, and the accelerator manages the process.

5) Fundraising Tools: the candidate is trained in how to use tools, such as a CRM, to manage the process. I've seen a lot of startups struggle with setting up the right infrastructure, and I'm sure candidates have the same challenges.

6) Public Speaking Training: Politicians need to be electrifying. Have politicians train with TV media experts to become compelling in front of the crowd.

7) Digital Profile: Help candidates set up a website, volunteer management tools, and social media tools. Create a standard set of tools for candidates.

9) Growth Hacking Team: a small squad of growth hackers who devise strategies for growth hacking political candidates. This team builds software and strategies, and these tools are disseminated to candidates through the training program. Think of it like a consulting firm within the program.

9) Intern Pool: Many early-stage state legislatures rely on interns to provide the manpower needed for the procedural aspects of campaigning and running office. The accelerator can help recruit thousands of interns from different sources, and it can provide each candidate with a constant stream of interns to provide the manpower needed to win. Interns are given credit for being part of the fellowship program (like YC fellows) and are part of a cohort with shared events, message board, hr people they can talk to.

10) MOOC: make a public MOOC to let people view the training program. This makes people excited about the program and interested in applying. It also helps scale the program, similar to How to Start a Startup.

If you'd like to follow up, my email is in my username.

Why not empower the people who pay for the product? The consumer? (students / parents)

> They're the ones who care the most about kids' learning

Sad that some parents care less than their teachers, but that's probably the root of 75% of education problems.

> Same goes to modern day dictatorships like North Korea. If not for international borders and internal controls, most North Koreans would probably prefer to leave their country. So, to continue the analogy, one could imagine a day in the future where as a small business owner, you are no longer able to attract any employees on the terms you're used to now -- not unless they are not employees, but co-workers with all equal rights and votes.

Again, I welcome whatever reality the free market thrusts upon me, and will react and adapt accordingly.

However this is incredibly far from reality because people actually like being employees. You don't have nearly as much risk. You don't have to make tough executive decisions with far-reaching consequences. Your levels of stress are lower. Etc. Those things are worth $$$, and we price them by CEO/founder compensation. It's not going to be perfect pricing, but it's the best we've got.

> Why exactly is it that you want to have your own totalitarian regime within the organization you started?

Because I believe that my decision making and skills with regards to a particular type of business in a particular type of market will yield me big returns, and so I want to put my money where my mouth is. Hence I saved up and founded my business.

> Besides, if you are the founder and know the business better than anyone, and have good leadership qualities, why wouldn't you be constantly re-elected as CEO?

Injecting this type of politics into a company is a fantastic way of slowing it to a crawl. Even if it's possible that one of my employees could be "better" than me at my job, we're not practically going to find out ("let's all try each other's job for a month!"). Or rather, it's not my responsibility to ask them -- if they think so they're free to go start their own company/competitor (subject to whatever non-compete clauses they may have signed, which you could argue is burdensome regulation, and I might be inclined to agree).

Besides, who says elections give us the best candidate? ;)

Unlike the North Korea example, the employees really do have options here. At least ideally they have as much choice as possible for who to work for, remember it's not like I put a gun to anyone's head when I asked them to join (or stay). A counterexample might be the H1-B's that are tied to their employer, but I don't have that particular relationship with any of my employees.

> And if your coworkers indeed approve of you as CEO, you would still get your greater earnings potential, although without being able to exploit your workers as much.

Just to wrap up, as I said above it's not worth the time for me to "poll" everyone. There are serious business consequences to injecting such a high level of politics into a company. What keeps me from exploiting my workers primarily are competitors, with competing potential offers, and the flow of information on the internet, e.g. 'this type of engineer makes X a year'.

Check out https://whoaremyrepresentatives.org