Throwing Away My Vote
“The wealthy, not only by private fraud but also by common laws, do every day pluck and snatch away from the people some part of their daily living. Therefore, when I consider and weigh in my mind these commonwealths which today do flourish, I perceive nothing but a certain conspiracy of rich men in procuring their own commodities under the name and authority of the commonwealth.
They invent and devise all means and crafts, first how to keep safely without fear of losing that which they have unjustly gathered together, and next how to hire and abuse the work and labor of the people for as little money and effort as possible.”
Thomas More, Utopia
We have two parties because at the beginning there were Republicans and Federalists. Each represented two different types of wealth: 1) agrarian 2) merchant/industrial.
That moved things along nicely until by 1826 and J.Q. Adams you had the son of the Federalist president being elected as a Republican with the competition from a couple of agrarians, Jackson and Clay.
Then the Democrats from the party of Jefferson for a term unopposed until the banksters of the time managed to invent the Whigs in opposition to King Andrew I and the agrarians.
Eventually the Whigs declined and the Republicans were reinvented as a party of banks, railroads, industry & merchants over against the Democrats who were still agrarians.
The heritage of two parties has been enthroned in USA as something that must be observed. Two choices must be all one gets. There are two parties as there are often two types of wealthy (historically) in USA that often clash. Until one gets subsumed into the other. Then one party temporarily disappears until the elites start battling yet again over what sorts of wealth to privilege.
Currently we have one of those periods where the parties merge and support the only privilege : pirate finance. Every other form of wealth takes third place and the “people” take very little indeed.
Actually the best hope seems to me to found and pick multiple political parties that divide the vote unmercifully. I’d like at least five and probably more like ten parties to exist viably and have anywhere from 20-120 Members of Congress each and the Senate to be divided with no party over about 25 votes, 5-10 parties.
I imagine that would be the perfect scenario for dividing and conquering the 1%. The more the merrier. The more chaotic and in need of coalition the legislative and executive and judiciary branches are divided the better off for those of us who haven’t much wealth at all.
Just look at the history. The turning point of the past century was when Eugene Debs, although jailed drew huge numbers of votes and that was crushed by the red raids and his own incarceration followed by the “prosperity” created by Wall Street to cover their own taking of the country.
The morons today are too greedy and vicious to even feel the need to hide their cupidity and crassness. Yet, one might ask, why should they? They have given the majority of the populace enough drugs and entertainments to mesmerize and anesthetize them and make them insensible of the loss of anything that may have once been termed “democratic” in the piratical and vampiric oligarchic culture of USA.
There exist alternatives to both Obama and whichever clown, seemingly Romney, manages to drive the Republican clown car to the 2012 general election. There are at least these alternatives: Stewart Alexander of the Socialist Party USA, Jill Stein of the Green Party USA and Ross “Rocky” Anderson of the Justice Party. There are alternatives.
Of course what I expect to hear is something like this that I have heard repeated ad infinitum since I was first eligible to vote back in 1972. “If you vote for someone not in the two legacy parties you’ll just throw away your vote.”
I’m not certain how that occurs. How I throw away my vote. For me to vote for Mitt Romney. Ron Paul or Rick Santorum or Barack Obama seems to me to cast my vote, quite literally before and to swine. I voted for Obama in 2008 thinking that nothing could be worse than Bush and the Republicans, only to come to reality sometime during 2010-2011 and see that something could be worse. What was worse was having an ostensible “progressive” push forward not only the practices of Bush-Cheney, but to carry many of those practices further than Bush-Cheney had pushed them.
It seems to me to cast a vote of any sort for any of the bought and paid for supporters of status quo is unacceptable. I also find it unacceptable to cast a vote for Ron Paul who may not be bought and paid for as yet. Why? Because Mr. Paul’s ideas about “liberty” will almost surely mean that he will make an end to civil rights legislation as he may be able and that he will tend to “even the playing field” by making those who have no power “compete” with the oligarchs who already have more power than they or their henchmen know how to use either effectively or for the benefit of anyone other than themselves.
Mr. Paul is a dangerous sort of creature. He’s a true believer in the nonsense of libertarianism which is, at base, a religious view that declares that with “freedom” in “markets” all good things come to exist in abundance. The credo of that religion sorely lacks a grounding in current reality, or any reality. It is a theologically premised politics that imagines purity and ideal as actually existent in the mucking about of legacy wealth, survival of the meanest and most ruthless, and a criminal syndicate in-charge of the country.
That religion never seems to see that it privileges those who are “already-have-more-than-enoughs;” and refuses to see that “markets” are never free but are front-loaded to favor those who control the “markets.”
Molly Ivins telling commentary about George W. Bush that “He was born on third base and thought he’s hit a triple” applies to most of who we term the 1%. I’d suggest that sending the inherited rich to the rooms in Den Hague where Milosevic and others have been tried would make a decent start to unraveling some global problems in order to effect solutions.
Libertarianism continues to promote such privilege and other forms as well, most particularly privileges that affect ethnicity, gender, wealth, countries of origin and various other privileged qualities that exist in USA.
Mr. Paul is positively against war against Iran and against the current monetary system, but he doesn’t seem to be against the military-industrial establishment. That being so, how would he propose to keep wars from occurring? Mr. Paul is short-sighted and doesn’t seem to imagine a world where the current shibboleths do not apply. His religious intensity is both amazing and somewhat frightening.
Thus, we should search out other options. For me to not do so is for me to concede that there are only the two choices that will be given me by the oligarchy. For me to vote for one of those two to “not throw my vote away” would be for me to throw my soul away and surrender meekly to the notion that there is nothing I can do.
Perhaps whichever candidate I chose to grant the privilege of having my vote this year will not win. But, I will also make bold to say that those who vote for either Obama or Romney will, for the most part, have cast their souls and their yearnings away. I’d rather “throw-away” my vote than “throw-away” my heart and soul.Explore posts in the same categories: Authenticity, Barack Obama, Community, Parenting, Women, Women and Men, Writing, WTF!!, Yes