|
The
Southern Question, and Other Thoughts
November
22, 2003
By Derek Underhill
Democratic Presidential Candidate Howard Dean’s recent comments
in reference to Southern voters and the Confederate Flag,
and more so the unwarranted political storm of condemnation
he received in response, have prompted me to write in-depth
about the underlying Southern problem he was referring to
in those comments. The underlying problem, unfortunately,
continues to fail exposure and rational, non-reactionary discourse.
It addresses the perceptions of middle and working-class white
Conservative voters, but affects the plight of all
working classes and races throughout the South to their detriment.
I see a lot of questions, presumptions, and bigotry about
these Southerners who tend to vote for Republicans like Bush.
The deep South is, understandably, a frustrating enigma to
Northerners and Liberals - but the reverse is also true. We
fear what, and who, we do not understand. One can argue that's
our animal instinct in living color, however unpleasant it's
manifestations. The Southern Conservative voters are not your
enemy; the powers that manipulate their perceptions are.
I was born and raised and currently still live in the deep
South, rural Louisiana. I was raised in a racist home, in
a racist community, in a racist state with a long racist history.
When turning 18, Republican was the default answer when registering
to vote at the DMV because it was a rite of passage in social
understanding as a white working-class male, that "Democrats
tax us to bribe poor Blacks with welfare, for their vote."
There is no doubt that racism remains a part of Southern life.
That certainty breaks down when we begin questioning why it
remains to this day, in the 21st Century, when we have more
access to information about each other than ever before. Indeed,
one would think there's no excuse not to understand each other
in this day and age. As for the South, aside from New Orleans
and perhaps Austin, we are culturally isolated from a world
at large that challenges perceptions and understanding of
each other.
What I write is based upon my observations and experience
with perceptions of the white middle and working-classes of
the South, which typically vote Republican. As a confession,
I was once one of the subjects this writing examines, until
life experiences forced me into a deep and chaotic introspection.
I have since found feelings that could be described, in political
terms, as "Progressive."
I do not address the social issues concerning the Wealth
classes below, as they are much of the reason the following
perceptions remain rampant in the South; from the following
examination, we can infer what their concerns are. I suspect
this is true, as it is the white Wealth classes who have the
money to disproportionately influence the local and State
political processes.
I examine the following perceptions so that you may better
understand the mentality constructing and holding those perceptions,
and the influences contributing to them - as well as hopefully
foster productive, rational discussions on how to challenge
these perceptions, thereby offering these working-class Southern
voters a reason to abandon the Republican party.
Here are some reasons the average working-class, white Conservative
voter supports the likes of Bush for high offices:
They've been deceived by politicians like Bush and his Republican
predecessors, convinced erroneously that the Republican party
Establishment represents interests other than their own and
the “Corporate Pimps” who employ them. Voters are encouraged
to participate during election periods, and then forgotten
afterwards. Wake up and vote, go back to sleep. Until we start
our first war, that is - and, just in case they get curious
at other times, there's Media like Fox News to the rescue.
They've been told, and demonstrated to, that anyone with
a "D" behind their name in high office will push for gun control.
This is a Liberal issue that lends to the Southern perception
that government is attempting to disarm the general population,
an historically common tactic boasted by totalitarian rulers.
Southerners enjoy hunting greatly, but most of all, they do
not feel that the government, nor police, is capable of defending
their home and family from intrusion and harm while it is
happening. They enjoy the protections that police do offer,
but feel it is their job to protect their family and
community, and that having guns is the only power they have
at all in a real, meaningful way. They have the culturally-ingrained
memory that a government "not theirs" can come and destroy
them at will. When they hear "gun control," a thousand-million
alarm bells go off in the Southern Conservative mind; that
measure takes away their only real sense of leverage against
tyrannical government. That feeling follows along the lines
of, "You don’t care about me, you don't represent me; as long
as I have my guns, you do what you do as long as you don't
tread on me." This is a kind of "understood," subconscious
contract between working-class whites and their Wealth & Political
masters.
This feeling makes the private ownership of guns a right
not taken for granted; indeed, the most important right for
them, especially in high-unemployment and high-crime areas.
There is evidence in the media that this "siege mentality"
is encouraged, this perception that there is always some evil
coming over the hill.
Southern Republican voters' relationship with the N.R.A.
can be explained in saying that, obviously, the N.R.A. is
fighting against the "abridgment," in any way, of the Second
Amendment protection of the right to bear arms. Any abridgment
is feared as leading into eventual prohibition. Fear. My perception
is that Liberals fear the exercising of this right by a population
and culture they do not understand (fear), and are at odds
with politically - and that Conservatives do not understand
(fear) why Liberals, whom they are at odds with politically,
want to abolish private ownership of arms. They do not buy
into the premise that prohibition addresses or discourages
violence, any more than Liberals buy into the premise that
illicit drug prohibition has effectively addressed or discouraged
use and abuse.
Southern Republican voters instinctively do not trust government
and professional politicians, especially any government or
politician attempting to disarm them, and therefore vote Republican
based on the perception that Conservatives are anti-big-government,
and appreciate the need for a "last-defense" against tyrannical
government held in the private ownership of arms. Notice that
Republican elites always claim and portray themselves to be
"one of them," not just for them. The tragedy of this defense
is that they are unaware our government and Media Establishment
elites now have such experience in controlling perceptions
through Corporate and Media collusion, that totalitarian rule
by force is no longer necessary. This perception of Conservatives
being anti-big-intrusive-government is one that Republican
powers seed and encourage, despite the fact that Bush is currently
presiding over the largest federal deficit-spending increase
in the history of the United States, as well as the biggest
threat to - and erosion of - civil liberties by Attorney General
John Ashcroft and the Patriot Act powers.
The Southern white working-class population knows subconsciously
that their government is not representative, but wrongly believe
Republican elites are their only hope. Any candidate or party
wanting to challenge this relationship must show them otherwise,
without rhetoric and conjecture but in their terms, to convey
that he or she truly understands their plight and aspires
to help them all better it. This means talking about the Southern
population's lack of educational infrastructure and diversity,
affordable access to healthcare and medicine for all, and
a worsening economy bleeding jobs. This is the best way to
get a foot into the deep South, and these are the most important
issues for them. We only see the issues of gun control and
religious-activist and moral agendas as being the most important
issues in the South because they are the only issues Republican
political elites address to their constituency - aside from
nearly constant talk of elusive terrorists roaming about.
This leaves economic and healthcare issues a "personal problem,"
not for politicians to fix in any meaningful way.
They watched Clinton (read as: "a Democrat") sign
the N.A.F.T.A., now apparently having the effect of selling
American jobs down the river to Mexico and elsewhere, while
opening the borders for foreigners to come and steal the jobs
we do have left here, thereby depressing wages and benefits.
Despite over 3 Million Americans losing their employment since
Bush was sworn in, they are told it was “a Democrat” that
has caused the exodus of jobs over the years. I'm not sure
if the W.T.O. and it's implications are known generally, but
I doubt it; there is no reporting here on foreign and economic
policies and implications, of course.
They are told that Clinton (read as: "a Democrat")
weakened our military and intelligence agencies via budget
cuts, and that all Democrats want to trash the military and
give its entire budget to the welfare system. They are told
this is what allows Islamic Arabs to blow up the World Trade
Center and terrorize the rest of the world because they hate
freedom. They are told Clinton had a chance to get bin Laden
in the 90's, but “because he was a spineless Democrat,”
he didn't commit to it - and that Gore in the 80's was against
fighting terrorism (how exactly, is never elaborated). And
of course, they are told Reagan was the God of All Presidents
- past and future.
The Republican elites have successfully laid the perception
of blame for their constituency's economic, social, and educational
suffering on the Democratic party Establishment, by way of
demonstrating that their "otherwise unnecessary taxes" are
unfairly stolen by Democrats for welfare programs and, encouragingly,
given to "unproductive blacks having babies left and right,"
and in return, vote for Democrats. They are told that if they
were not taxed for this grave injustice, things would be great,
they could finally “get ahead” if only they were not supporting
“unproductive black women” and their dozen or so expectedly-unproductive
kids. This perception is tremendously seeded and encouraged
by the Republicans here, more so than any other perception,
and observed evidence is paraded through private gossip at
every opportunity as vindication of the reasons working-class
whites are suffering, and can never get ahead. There is no
class teaching this, but the effect is such that you'd assume
there has to be; it's "understood" by early teens.
This perception, while certainly inflamed, is not without
some truth. Indeed, there are still welfare "abuses" here
despite welfare reform, but it is unknown how widespread it
really is throughout the South. For clarity, "abuses" seem
to be defined as having babies merely for the sake of receiving
more welfare income. Assertions and suspicions of abuses are
never doubted for a second. One observation, or mere suspicion
of abuse, spreads via gossip like a California wildfire, and
with it, violent anger and reinforcement of racism. It is
suspected, now anyway, there are just as many poor whites
"abusing" the system in this regard; they are undoubtedly
the targets of Jerry Springer-type ridicule.
There is very high unemployment in my parish, with poorly
performing schools and a joke of a community college across
the river in Mississippi. The largest industrial employer,
International Paper, shut down operations and 650 jobs this
past summer due to “soft market.” There is no investment here,
and any industry that comes calling for employees are chased
away by the local Wealth-class ("Heritage Club") protecting
their tourism dollars made with their immaculate Antebellum
homes, which employs very few people outside of souvenir shops
and a few hotels. There is also a Casino here, which does
not pay out anything, ever, and so is a vacuum for community
money - and they want to bring in yet another Casino. Super
Wal-mart has closed small businesses, as well as a large grocery
store, while depressing many others - and is almost the only
large retailer left. Lack of job and educational opportunities
offer young people little choice but to leave the region in
search of survival. Louisiana and Mississippi, at least within
the county across the river, have seen nothing less than the
exodus of it’s young over the previous years. Very few stay
here in my community; there's nothing to keep them there.
On education, middle and working-class whites are also told
relentlessly that they are being taxed for "undeserving blacks
who have not made the grades,” to go to college via Affirmative
Action or minority quotas - with public funding. They are
told that these undeserving folks continuously change majors
to avoid accountability, while whites cannot get the same
funding for an education if their parents earn over poverty-level
income (but still cannot afford the high tuition of college),
forcing whites into heavy debt via loans before they've even
started. This is why working-class Southern Republican voters
are militantly opposed to policies like Affirmative Action.
While abuses do take place, I'm afraid these isolated observations,
shared with others, only lend to the perception that all
blacks "work the system" and in exchange vote for Democrats
- or vote for Democrats because they are intentionally
given a system to "work." It is as “common knowledge” for
whites here as the fact that Earth is round. It is an issue
for working and middle-class whites in the South, and a perception
that will not go away until credibly addressed. The Republican
elites certainly will not address it; they stand as benefiting
most from keeping whites and blacks at each other's throats.
In my opinion, this issue is perhaps the most defining reason,
next to gun control, that working-class Conservative whites
hate Democrats by default, and vote Republican; these are
the perceptions I hear most in complaint of policies advocated
by Democrats. Any Candidate who wishes to inform working-class
whites away from the Republican party will have to get close
to and mediate both races involved in this issue, listen to
their concerns, and formulate ways to challenge these perceptions
both with reason and action so that all involved stand to
benefit and improve their plights with the solutions offered.
This issue is also why Southern whites are knee-jerk against
Universal Health Care suggestions; they feel it will mean
more of their taxes are dumped into another welfare system
for unproductive people to “mooch” off of, while receiving
no real benefit for their own families. They are also told
that Social Security will be bankrupted by all of these "welfare
programs."
Now a bit about those whom Howard Dean addressed recently:
those flying the Confederate Flags. Firstly, there are those
who call themselves “Red-Necks.” They are a minority of the
Conservative working-class and poor whites. Most know little
more about Confederate history and it’s flag than the fact
that “we lost,“ but the ones who do know that history (read:
“Sons of Confederate Veterans”) speak enough anger to make
up for it. These white males are more "educated" by angry
gossip than any educational institution. Most have little
education, no hope for a future, and are extremely angry about
it. There is an “Underground KKK,” which attempts to lure
these angry white males into their ranks; this I have personally
witnessed, and they are generally regarded as troublesome,
“gives us a bad name” fringe - even among the “Red-Necks."
Their music of choice, country, has been half-dominated by
lyrics of despair, longing for something better, sacrifice,
or triviality. Their minds are like fortresses, letting little
in but what already fits the parameters their branding of
prejudices dictate. For some, conflict offers a sense of identity.
In the absence of liberal education - a means of examining
the world around and inside ourselves - without conflict or
achievement they have no meaningful identity, no way to measure
themselves relative to the world. This may explain why there’s
always been a “warrior class,” with the conflict of war romanticized
as noble, honorable - with no consideration for what motives
that war truly serves; war itself is it’s own meaning, a meaning
offering identity. Many of the “Red-Necks," while resenting
authority, fantasize about different life: a warrior’s life
among the elite military.
Others who fly the “Rebel Flag,” but do not fit the above
description, are the working-class with family to support.
They are most likely the majority. For them, the flag is a
symbol representing, subconsciously, their resentment with
a life unfulfilling and out of their control - void of opportunity
to have made a better life for themselves and their children
than poverty has. It represents resentment of a hidden authority
which is felt as oppressive, working behind scenes they do
not understand, which seems to proactively enforce this void
upon them. Some don’t know what this hidden authority is;
others are told and believe it is the Democratic party, by
way of taxing them and giving it to others while they themselves
have so little. This sect of Confederate Flag-folks is somewhat
sensitive to the racism they feel in that, most of the time,
they make conscious effort not to display racism.
Others still, who fly the Rebel Flag as a bumper sticker
or patch on a biker’s vest, do so with little conscious purpose
but for fitting an idealized, non-conforming identity that
says “I'm not one of you, and you won't make me be one.” They,
around here at least, tend to be under 30, some smoke pot,
and most have friends of all races despite growing up in a
racist home. Until just recently, the Rebel Flag and “Colonel
Rebel” were part of Mississippi University’s sports identity,
though the name “Rebels” remain.
I would like to have been able to address the opposition
of Abortion Rights that is so strong throughout the South,
but I’m afraid that - aside from pointing to the obvious campaigns
waged by Conservative religious-activists - I do not understand
the perceptions of others here well enough on this issue to
address it without conjecture.
I can only speak briefly about the perceptions on Gay and
Lesbian civil-rights opposition here. Within my community
at least, there has been no visible or acknowledged exposure
to Gays and Lesbians, and reactions to Media exposure is such
that it's considered as alien as green Martians would be,
or otherwise just too odd. With no exposure, there can be
no “normalization,” acceptance, and understanding. Remember,
we fear what and who we do not understand, especially that
which overtly differs from our image of the world and ourselves.
Until we understand something, we cannot determine how threatening
it may be. Fearing the unknown is a dominating characteristic
of human nature; it’s how we’ve survived, but it’s not helpful
in understanding. Establishment powers take advantage of,
and harness, this aspect of human nature as a means of manipulating
our perceptions. Fear.
Finally, The Democratic Leadership has not challenged these
perceptions in any effective way in the South. For one, it's
hard to credibly challenge perceptions you do not experience
or understand for yourself - a difficulty that is non-partisan.
Ignorance, misconception, and fear of each other will thrive
as long as we fail to share perceptions, ideas, and facts
about each other - with one another - to learn what works
and what does not, what is truth and what is not. The Establishment
elites, whose policies are demonstrated as not being in the
People’s best interests economically and socially, have thrived
because the ignorance, misconceptions, and fear they depend
on have not been opposed effectively and credibly.
Considering this, it makes me personally sick to read people’s
suggesting a desertion of the South as a lost cause. Pardon
me, but who the hell else is going to counter ignorance and
propaganda? This proposed tactic of lost-cause-desertion would
be a self-fulfilling prophecy, and frankly, sounds like one
Karl Rove himself would approve of. In a void, some other
party will aspire to offer meaningful opposition eventually;
there is a market for truth, after all. If the Democratic
party does not clean-house of it’s political complacency and
collusion - and unite to confront and oppose ignorance, misconceptions,
propaganda, and fear - then it should step aside for others
who propose to, and aspire to represent the entire United
States. Why else even call it a United States at the point
you consider half the nation a lost cause? If you wonder why
people assert "The South Will Rise Again!," and it seems to
be happening, your answer lies in parochial Establishment
politics more entrenched in their own power-struggle than
doing what's in the interests of the People.
I see many people regarding the South as a nuisance where
the struggle to win a certain number of it's States is the
center of every election, but otherwise not all that important.
I disagree. The South will be the key to turning the National
tide in the long run. Breaking the Republican's grip on the
working-classes of the South, who are appeased but unrepresented,
is the only way I see to reduce Republican power in this country.
By shifting a greater portion of votes away from them within
their stronghold, this - in turn - increases the relevance
and power of each person’s vote. Without political power,
their money cannot save them; they depend on that political
power to build and protect their Wealth through unrepresentative
foreign and domestic policy & legislation.
I feel it is our obligation to help counter ignorance as
well as we’re capable, no matter how futile it may seem. We
cannot force others to see what we want them to see, and asking
them to is severely limited in it’s effectiveness; however,
we can help them see for themselves by combating that which
isolates them, and ourselves, from new understanding. People
are unable to form an accurate image of the world within such
isolation void of challenges to their perceptions.
I see a big problem that is plaguing party politics with
steel-rigid party platform loyalty: preaching only to their
own choirs about problems, ideas, and possible solutions.
Liberals advocate Liberal solutions to Liberals; Conservatives
advocate Conservative solutions to Conservatives. There is
no real mediation between us all because in this era it's
all about the money and power and who will get more of it
- while not getting anything meaningful done, or worse, and
certainly not making progress in improving the human condition.
We are not behaving like a nation, but two countries disputing
borders. We are becoming more polarized by the day, and that
suits the Establishment elites just fine; as long as we are
divided and warring with each other, we have no time to notice
that, in reality, we're all being screwed the same. This is
The Great Deception, and the game of politics as we‘ve come
to know it.
Politics is the Art of Seizing Power; Democracy is the Art
of Diplomacy and Negotiation for facilitating social cohesion,
cooperation, peace and progress by social contract. It's my
perception that the "Establishment" of both parties,
Republican and Democratic, are guilty of playing the Art of
Seizing Power at our expense for so long now, that we people
living in the real world are suffering the horrible consequences
of an ultimately unrepresentative and unaccountable government,
thrilled just getting peanuts' worth of attention from those
we elect, while the real threat of fascism grows as a way
of government for the future. The protection fascism offers
is perhaps the only way modern Capitalism can survive,
or at least prolong, it's unpredictably cannibalistic and
viral nature. In my opinion, we are not merely flirting with
fascism today, it is here: Corporate power has effectively
and unmistakably merged with Political power via politicians
becoming beholden to the Corporate Establishment for their
political survival, which is no accident of course. The only
question now is whether it will remain a part of "our" government
through yet another century, which is of course whether we
will respond to it's threat to our independence and freedom
by removing it and prohibiting the vehicles it uses to corrupt
our government offices.
No matter which Establishment seizes power in this era, we
move further away from working towards true, sustainable progress
for humanity. Our election-by-election priorities are myopic
and corrupt. Each election we collectively seem more "normalized"
with the status quo of a government out of the People's control
no matter who is elected, with both parties’ constituency
seemingly intent on supporting candidates who perpetuate this
ultimately unresponsive system by becoming more and more beholden
to, and collusive with, interests of private power and money.
Meanwhile, We the People debate his or her personality quirks
and marital indiscretions, as if he or she were entertainment
rather than a steward of Democracy. The average non-political
or apathetic voter today does not view each party as representing
a type of government each, but representing distinct special
interests all divorced from the Public Good, of which they
choose the perceived lesser of two evils.
We online are actively interested in our Government, and
tend to feel that everything will be right again “if we’ll
just win the next election,” but when I step away from this
online world I see that a great many out there feel helpless
and hopeless - or worse, apathetic - about their relevance
to it all. Even the ones who wake up to vote. Having a look
at the statistics on what percentage of eligible voters do
not participate in their "Democracy" is troubling. This has
to change. A Democratic society cannot remain Democratic with
a de-politicized population; half the population is not enough
to make it work.
Taking the long view, while great progress has been made
in Civil Rights, the last fifty years especially have seen
one setback after another in Democratic government and confidence
in it - each administration seizing and exercising more power
for itself than the last, and each congress emancipating itself
more from accountability to and representation of the People
than the last - which is itself the primary threat to those
same Civil Rights we've fought so hard to secure. That entrenchment
of power does not recede with a change of parties every two,
four, or eight years; it gets passed along, as if an inside
tradition of elites as conditions get worse for us. Considering
this, maintaining the status quo of concentrated power makes
the erosion of individual power, relevance, and freedom inevitable.
Whether “we” win or “they” win, we all lose.
Party power-politics are no less mob-rule than PACs and the
army of Corporate Lobbyists in D.C.; in such an arrangement,
half the people are always going to gain at the expense of
the other half; in such an arrangement, it's only a matter
of who's bending over and getting it this time around; in
such an arrangement, equality, liberty and justice for all
is a schoolbook fantasy. It is a blasphemy to call this arrangment
Democratic. That's the way it is, sure, but to me it looks
insane. While we’re busy squabbling over policies and who
gets to drive the train this term, the "Thieving Class” is
free to tend to their affairs. This is no accident, and is
itself the reason they have sought to - and succeed in - controlling
the mainstream Media, while effectively killing investigative
agencies and journalism that could throw a monkey wrench into
their affairs by connecting-the-dots and exposing them.
They don't consciously view it as conspiring to control our
government and perceptions, but as an elite right of Wealth;
to them, it's business as usual no matter who gets elected
because they see to it that we elect only those who will not
cause trouble, but keep the masses occupied. They accomplish
this by demonizing those they cannot ignore, who would question
and challenge this Establishment structure, or marginalize
those they can.
We need to closely study the techniques of propaganda to
defend ourselves against this silent and stealthy manipulation.
Through mass Media culture, our opinions are manipulated into
an "operating structure" that we presume serves our best interests
because we presume "my" opinions and perceptions form that
operating structure; however, the Southern Question highlights
that our perceptions and opinions can be, and are, manipulated.
Are we really assessing the validity of choices, and making
informed decisions between them, thereby exercising "free
will," if they are within undisclosed parameters and rules
we do not understand or control? Disclosure is the only thing
which stands between us and treachery. Who’s to say our candidates
of choice are truly running for us? Who's to say they are
not "plants" by the Establishment elites, or at least tolerated
because they won't cause much trouble? Again, they've got
us so busy with triviality, they no longer need totalitarian
rule by force to keep the masses subdued.
Our government as a whole does not truly represent us, even
if a few politicians do; and if, as a whole, it does not truly
represent us, then it cannot rightfully be called Democratic
- even if some parts and participants are once in a while.
It’s not dependent upon who or what party is in office each
term; the system itself ceased to be representative and accountable
to the People the days "Corporate Personhood," Corporate Lobbying,
Corporate monopoly of profit-driven mainstream News Media,
and Corporate "donations" to political parties and candidates
was born. Since then, if they want to remain influential and
relevant in any capacity within the grand scheme of things,
politicians have been forced into (or rather enjoy) a game
of political prostitution that is out of their - our - control.
There are very few exceptions to this rule, and they rarely
make a blip on the radar screen of relevance. In other words,
those who don’t whore are ignored - even by the voters who
ask for honest representatives of integrity, but find them
“unelectable.”
One problem is that the Democratic voters are no less plagued
by the same cult-of-personality tendency Republicans are guilty
of with Reagan and Bush. In watching arguments on the merits
of Democratic candidates, I've seen more debate on (what amounts
to) whether he or she would play the best game within the
boundaries set by the opposition, than whether their candidate
of choice will not only break those rules but also expose
the game itself in doing so. Rocking the boats of Establishment
power is not enough; we have to capsize them, drowning them
before they drown our government and us along with it.
This coming Presidential election is probably more crucial
than any in decades, as it will decide just how less we expect,
for the 21st Century, to control a government now vulnerable
to factional extremists. Getting Bush's administration out
of power is priority number one; "Anyone But Bush" is the
new mantra, that's just how bad it really is. It would be
ideal to accomplish that and, setting candidate preferences
aside, vote for whomever stands for helping us get real, meaningful
control over our government - something we lost with the 20th
century rise of "Corporate Personhood." If an extremist administration
like Bush's can seize power, without immediate fundamental
overhauls after his removal, our government is weak and vulnerable
enough for it to happen again at any time, and by even more
extreme ideologues.
I'm not going to tell you here which candidate would be best
to support; naturally that's for you to decide. I'm not sure
yet if there is a candidate running that can both fit this
tall order and defeat Bush by a clear margin in ‘04. However,
I would like to ask you to consider these critical things
I've mentioned which I feel get drowned in party-power politics,
in considering which candidate to support.
I'm not voting for wrestling power between two parties; I
am disillusioned with it's effectiveness in real human progress.
The stakes are high in this election, so I will vote against
Bush in '04 no matter who gets nominated to face him. However,
in perpetuating party-power politics as it is, I fear we are
all ultimately sacrificing the biggest thing at stake: a government
of and for the People, and with it our freedom. Make no mistake,
We the People no longer control our government; the sooner
that delusion is dispelled, the sooner we can take back our
government. We did not lose control of our government when
Clinton left office and Bush stole it; we lost control many
decades prior, throughout nearly the entire 20th Century,
which has systematically weakened it to the degree that a
faction like Bush’s was now able to seize power illegitimately.
Bush’s coup was the result of that fundamental weakening of
our government from the inside-out, and a de-politicized and
apathetic population as a symptom. There should be some honest,
serious, no-BS discussions about the likely intentions of
each candidate - beyond what they‘ve done, beyond what they
say, but more to what they are likely to do, and using
all of the above to determine that.
Whether “we” win or “they” win, the illusion of control by
the People is maintained as long as we play within their boundaries,
by the Established elites' rules. A choice between an "R"
and a "D" or "G," or any other alphabet, is no real choice
if they are all corrupt and only concerned with their own
power, content maintaining the Establishment status quo. This
problem of choice in our era can be illustrated by one example:
it doesn't matter which American news company you tune into
today, you're not going to get information that's in your
best interests, because their best interests lies in not providing
enough of it for you to truly make an informed decision on
what yours is. Power is power - whether it's in media, politics,
or money. To concede what you need and want is to let you
retain your individual power, and that is certainly not in
Establishment elites’ best interests. The fact the We the
People are “conceded” policies and rights demanded only after
long battles, should itself be an alarming clue as to just
who controls our government.
In our era, it's a professional politician's job to use your
power, money's job to buy it, and the Media's job to con you
into believing you really have it. Ignore this at your peril.
We are far too trusting of our parties’ leadership and candidates,
especially those we like personally, even in this cynical
age. The power they wield is entirely too dangerous and potentially
machiavellian to take our critical eyes off any of them for
one second. It's in our best interests to draft into candidacy
at every opportunity, those who actively speak out against
maintaining this farce of a choice between corruptions merely
of different flavor. We must demand of candidates integrity
and dedication to TRUE Democracy, to truth itself, and not
settle for anything less - while severely punishing those
who knowingly betray the duties of their office and the spirit
with which they were written. We have to “clean house” if
we are to reverse the inertia of what is shaping up to be
a coming train wreck.
|
