Just thinking out loud here, but I believe
there’s a certain sense in what I have to say:
Perhaps it would be best if we
dropped the second party and just went with one-party rule. Let's get rid of the Democrats and let Trump and McConnell have the whole ball of wax.
Hear me out.
For one thing, it
would stop all the partisan bickering. Think of how pleasant social media would once again be when half of us are no longer engaged in tearing down the party of the other half. And instead of talking about candidates, which is the subject of small minds, we could be discussing issues, which is the subject of great minds.
Plus, think about what Trump is doing and why
he’s doing it: he’s appealing to his base. If we were all his base, he would
want to appeal to us all. He wants to be loved, he wants approval, he wants
people to admire him. If he did not have a second party that opposed him, he
could work to appeal to the wishes of everyone. We'd probably have medicare for all and our troops out of the Middle East by now.
What value do the Democrats add to the process,
anyhow? Whenever they have attacked him, really attacked him and not merely
fake clapped at him, they have attacked him from the right. Other than that, they're just there so that Trump supporters have someone to blame for the failures of their candidate.
Democrats have attacked Trump any time he wasn’t sufficiently
militarily aggressive towards a nation that wasn’t subservient to the American
Empire. They have attacked him for colluding with Russia although a years-long investigation turned up no proof of that assertion. FOUR YEARS we wasted on that canard when we could have been discussing other issues.
And besides, once Trump is elected, we can force him to the left. That's a thing, isn't it? People have been telling me for years that we just have to elect a bad candidate and then work to force that bad candidate left. Well, if it works for Democratic presidents, it should work for Republicans, too. Right?
I think the worst thing about having a SECOND party is the illusion it creates that we actually have an OPPOSITION party. The
human psyche, when given two options, starts trying to differentiate between
them even though no appreciable differences exist.
Anyone who’s found
themselves unable to choose between the various options of French fries at a
supermarket has felt this. Anybody who’s gone to a Blockbuster (old person reference here) looking for a
funny movie and found themselves presented with a choice of two Adam Sandler
movies knows what I’m talking about. There are certain weaknesses in humans
that can be used to manipulate us, and the illusion of choice is a biggy.
Give us two options and we will always feel
smarter and more in charge when we choose one. And in politics, give us two
options and we will inevitably blame whatever negative outcomes we experience
on those who choose differently. Give us two options and we will defend the one
we’ve chosen, because we want to be right.
But give us just one option and all of the sudden
we will begin to clearly see the imperfections that exist. Give us one option
and we won’t feel responsible for it and so we will feel free to criticize it. We will no longer smugly sit back and think "If they had done it my way, everything would be great right now. Well, I'll just sit back and watch while the country is ruined because of THEIR stupid idea."
Give us one option and we can once again feel
united. Our ruler will no longer be able to divide us but must answer to all of
us. We will feel a certain amount of power
in that we can have a collective sense of expectation. The balance of power
will no longer be about conservatives against liberals but rulers against those
who are ruled.
But here’s the most important part, and tell me
if you believe otherwise: it doesn’t matter who is in charge. It ultimately doesn’t matter
who has control of the army or the police or the media or the wealth of a
country. No group of people can be controlled by a ruler or a government unless
they give their consent. If a ruler or a ruling class does not receive the
consent of the governed, they have no authority. If they have to use violence,
they can rule for a time, but their end will not be pleasant. If their claim to
authority can be strengthened by manufacturing consent, they can rule until
such a time that even the absolute control of narrative cannot help it maintain its
grip on the populace. Narrative can only stray so far from reality before a break
occurs.
If the people are discontented, the rulers will
never know peace. The less confusion the people have over who has power, the
more the people will be able to concentrate their discontent towards those who
claim to be helping them. But divide the blame into two parties and you can endlessly distract the people by having half the population blame the other half.
The single best thing that can happen to the American populace is for them to realize that the ruling class is not divided but in fact united AGAINST them. So let's get rid of one of these two corporate parties--I don't care, take your pick-- so that we can unite against the remaining one. When we are united then, and only then, we will be able to bring about the change we need. Because there is no government or group of people able to rule against the will of the people.
Like my writing? Please follow me on Twitter or Facebook, sign up for my newsletter, or check me out on Amazon.
No comments:
Post a Comment