New blogger Jim Moore wonders if the worldwide protest movement of the last five or so years might be the next superpower. Sound silly? Then how about Kyoto, Seattle, Turin, Davos, and the International Criminal Court?

Who is the second superpower? Jim had this to say:

Second superpower people identify themselves as citizens of the world, and care about social development, collaboration, innovation, open societies, and commons. They believe that at heart all people are precious and are one. Second superpower people need not be conventionally liberal or conservative, because there is political and social innovation yet to be done, and current political categories are certainly outmoded. Perhaps people with second superpower beliefs constitute a bit over 10% of the population in the US–let’s say 30 million people. Perhaps there are 40 million more in Europe, and 10 million in Japan, and several million living in the rest of the world in Asia, India, Africa, and South America. Web-enabled, this group is both “virtually local” and realtime mobilized, and is thus an increasingly influential force. On a worldwide basis the activist numbers add up to a very sizable group, despite second superpower members being minorities in their own nations.

So now you know. Very similar to what globalization thinker Richard Falk calls globalization-from-below. Next step? Jim passes along his friend’s suggestion that we run someone for US President, perhaps John Perry Barlow. (I didn’t know who he was and had to look the guy up. He used to write for the Grateful Dead, coined the term “cyberspace,” and is now a Fellow at Harvard.)

I’ll personally have a hard time voting for a Boomer, much less a former hippie, but I could be persuaded. I do know that the Democrats can’t be counted on to include us as a core constituency, and the Greens don’t have their act together enough to make it worth our time. (Please, though, both of you prove me wrong.) However it’s to be done, it needs to start now. If the idea doesn’t catch on by, say, the Fourth of July, it’s dead in the water. I was talking to two wealthy progressives last night, and they were already trying to decide who to give moolah to in the Democratic primary.

If there was a groundswell and if a candidate made it to the ballot, the momentum (judging from past successes) would at least need to be countered by the powers-that-be. And that was enough for the progressive and populist movements of a century ago to get most everything they wanted without ever getting their own candidate into the White House. If Jim’s estimate of 30 million Americans in the movement is accurate, that’s over 25% of the last cycle’s total votes. Does anyone remember how much trouble Ross Perot caused? Imagine what might have happened if he hadn’t been crazy and hadn’t kept jumping in and out of the ring. (And I don’t think that’s a lot to ask for in a candidate.)

Assuming global support for such a candidate, it could have the effect of globalizing Western elections, or at least creating stronger ties between parties of simliar ideologies in different nation-states. Keeping 80 million people content is a real pain in the ass, moreso if they can cause trouble not just at home but also with your allies. (Assuming the US still has allies worthy of the name after Iraq.) It could even move us closer to something resembling a cosmopolitan democracy.