Selection vrs Election

       The Democracy Hype

Much has been made of the potential spread of democracy around the world.  The words Pax Americana, can be heard, and might not be far off.  Democracy has become a catch all media buzz word, generally used to justify some manor of intervention. Which likely looks anything but democratic in nature.  As an American I can not deny the obviously selective nature of our desire for other nations to experience the blessings of democratic rule. The examples of support for "friendly" dictatorships by the United States would be laughable if it weren't so hypocritical.  While media outlets tout the overthrow of one regime as a victory for the people, and blow for democracy. Movements in nations with western friendly dictatorships are in large part ignored, and often these governments are receiving aid, or military backing from the US.  Leaving it painfully obvious, that as a nation we are far more concerned with our perceived national self interest than any notions of self determination, or democracy.  In the US we pride ourself on our right to vote, yet how many feel represented? How many even know how our electoral system works?  Democracy is great, one of the most amazing innovations, but like so many things context plays it's role.

     The Choice We Can't See

To serve as an elected public official can be viewed in many ways, an honor, an act of duty, maybe even a burden. The one thing for the public well-being it would best left not thought of is as a career. By the time a candidate is offered for your consideration, they have already been approved by their party, and in the days of money equals speech, the contributors.  It's not really a surprise than to see that often organizations fund both parties equally.  Call it strategic planning, or corporate governance, the effect is undue influence to put it nicely.  If you did notice, there were many on that list that did not fund both sides, which is just as telling.  When you have only two main political parties as entrenched as and pervasive as in the US, they can not be opposites, they can only be opposames. The parties never leave power, they share power, just changing the distribution. We find ourselves in a the role of child being offered choice as a balm for all the no's in our daily existence.

    Factions

 In an absolute government there can be no... equiponderant parties. The despot is the government. His power suppressing all opposition, maintains his ministers firm in their places. What he has contracted, therefore, through them, he has the power to observe with good faith; and he identifies his own honor and faith with that of his nation." --Thomas Jefferson to John Langdon, 1810. ME 12:377

"Warring against [the principles] of the people,... there is no length to which [the delusion of the people] may not be pushed by a party in possession of the revenues and the legal authorities of the United States, for a short time indeed, but yet long enough to admit much particular mischief. There is no event, therefore, however atrocious which may not be expected." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Smith, 1798. (*) ME 10:56   

Now revisit the idea that our parties never leave power, are backed pretty equally by most major corporate entities, in a nation who's currency is owned/controlled by a what amounts to a private bank.  Our two party system with elections, is seeming to offer less and less of real choice.


As always, make up your own mind
Jack
aka
PansyBard