Index

18  RIGHT ANALYSIS BUT WRONG SOLUTION

Einstein is quoted as saying that a problem identified is half solved. But that presupposes that the analysis will point the technician towards the best solution. With complex issues, especially if they have been shrouded with mythology and misinformation, there is no guarantee at all that the right solution will be identified and then applied.

We have just stumbled over an example of this on an internet list that commonly talks and shares a lot of very good sense, but this time seems to be in the wrong paddock. As they are so often so helpful, we will change names to avoid any embarrassment.

Contributor Jack sent in a brilliant summary of the defects and deficiencies of the present sham democracy, including the way (U.S.) corporations in collusion with the Two Party Club, the Education System, and the privately owned news media networks is not only dumbing down the whole population, but becoming an international monster against the wishes of the citizenry, and convincing them that because they are allowed to choose every few years between two political parties that are both funded by the same corporations and so have basically similar policies, then, Hurrah, Hurrah, we have a real democracy. The relationship between Big Business and the Banking Sector which has already generated enough debt out of thin air to keep workers in slavery ad infnitum was also recognised as part of the problem.

So far, so very, very good. But apparently Jack's education managed to keep him away from seeing and learning about innovative governments which have worked out solutions to those problems: How to constitutionally hobble politicians who want to become dictators; and how to force the changing of Electoral Rules to break the stranglehold of Big Business on political parties, and achieve in Parliament a democratic spread that replicates the real community, and virtually kills the dangerous situation of one party securing unbridled control of the lawmaking and administration machinery.

(Wouldn't the thought of that give the Bush Team hysterics ?) So share the following analysis; but ask yourself if the suggested solution will do any more than provide laughs for the power brokers behind the scenes.... (We quote:)

The Grand Delusion - by Jack.

With an endless, futile and costly Iraq war, a stinking economy and most Americans seeing the country on the wrong track, the greatest national group delusion is that electing Democrats in 2008 is what the country needs.

Keith Olbermann was praised when he called the Bush presidency a criminal conspiracy. That missed the larger truth. The whole two-party political system is a criminal conspiracy hiding behind illusion induced delusion.

Virtually everything that Bush correctly gets condemnation for could have been prevented or negated by Democrats, if they had had courage, conviction and commitment to maintaining the rule of law and obedience to the Constitution. Bush grabbed power from the feeble and corrupt hands of Democrats. Democrats have failed the vast majority of Americans. So why would sensible people think that giving Democrats more power is a good idea? They certainly have done little to merit respect for their recent congressional actions, or inaction when it comes to impeachment of Bush and Cheney.

One of the core reasons the two-party stranglehold on our political system persists is that whenever one party uses its power to an extreme degree it sets the conditions for the other party its partner in the conspiracy - to take over. Then the other takes its turn in wielding excessive power. Most Americans - at least those that vote - seem incapable of understanding that the Democrats and Republicans are two teams in the same league, serving the same cabal running the corporatist plutocracy. By keeping people focused on rooting for one team or the other, the behind-the-scenes rulers ensure their invisibility and power.

The genius of the plutocrats is to create the illusion of important differences between the two parties, and the illusion of political choice in elections. In truth, the partner parties compete superficially and dishonestly to entertain the electorate, to maintain the aura of a democracy. Illusion creates the delusion of Americans that voting in elections will deliver political reforms, despite a long history of politicians lying in campaigns abou treforms, new directions and bold new policies. The rulers need powershifting between the teams to maintain popular trust in the political system. Voting manifests that trust - as if changing people will fix the system. It doesn't.

So voters become co-conspirators in the grand political criminal conspiracy.

Those who vote for Democrats or Republicans perpetuate the corrupt, dishonest and elitist plutocracy that preferentially serves the interests of the Upper Class and a multitude of special interests - some aligned with the Republicans and some with the Democrats. Voting only encourages worthless politicians and those that fund and corrupt them.

Nor have Democrats stood up to challenge the official 9/11 story that no longer has any credibility to anyone that takes the time to seriously examine all its inconsistencies with what really happened and the laws of physics.

Whoever wins the Democratic presidential nomination will not be free of corruption and lies. He or she will owe paybacks to all the fat-cat campaign donors. Voters will be choosing the lesser-evil Democratic presidential candidate. Is that really the only choice? Is there no other action that can advance the national good?

There seem to be just two other choices. Vote for some third party presidential candidate, but the downside of that is twofold. No such candidate can win in the current rigged system. Worse, voting gives a stamp of credibility to the political system, as if it was fair, when it is not. Voting says that you still believe that the political system merits your support and involvement. The second option is to boycott voting to show total rejection of the current political system and the plutocratic cabal using the two-party duopoly to carry out its wishes.

We have broken government because the spirit of Americans that gave us our revolution and nation's birth has been broken, in large measure by distractive and self-indulgent consumerism. It is better to recognize that those who vote suffer from delusion than to criticize those who do not vote as apathetic. Non-delusional non-voters recognize the futility of voting.

Democrats will not restore our democracy. That is the painful truth that most people will not readily accept. Such is the power of group delusion. Voting produces never-ending cycles of voter dissatisfaction with those elected, both Democrats and Republicans. It is time to break this cycle of voter despair. Voters that bitch and moan about Congress and the White House have nobody to blame but themselves, no matter which party they voted for.

OUR COMMENTS: One experienced political observer (Don Bethune of Godzone) absolutely endorses the above contribution on how the corporates and complicit two party club have usurped the democratic machinery, and converted U.S. into a virtual corporate, fascist state; a Big Business dictatorship. And how the brainwashed citizenry have been deluded into thinking that the right to vote between two cabals , who get equally funded by, and owe subservience to, the same moneybags, can constitute "democracy".

But the accurate analysis ends there - and then displays an indictment of the U.S. Education System and News Media. Why are students and our Joe Bloggs's not told of the fundamental facts of democratic life?

Instead of waving the "No Vote" flag, which is just a weak excuse for capitulation, why doesn't Jack campaign for adding the Swiss Initiative on to the U.S. Constitution? (That well tested and demonstrated political mechanism , has for over a century contributed towards that country achieving an incredibly high quality democracy; and very high standard of living , despite a fairly low per capita share of the world's natural resources.)

Its essence is simple. It endows any 50,000 citizens with the right to petition Parliament for a referendum on ANY question they feel is important.

No ifs or buts; the state must at its own expense put that question to the voters, including providing an independent assessment of both sides of the issue. Then, like it or lump it, the result is BINDING on the state. It is REAL democracy; the people determine the policy. It is a democratic "leg-rope"; an ideal halter for any politician who gets ideas of using political power to build an empire/look after his corporate mates/help big business to control the news media/etc.

The reason U.S. citizens are not pushing, particularly at the present time, for a mechanism like this is that their "sanitized" education system never told them that such a mechanism existed; let alone effectively controlled powerful politicians with dictatorial ambitions, and apparently no respect for the truth.

There is also a simple and well tried solution to the taking over of the two political parties which automatically result from the FPP (First Past Post) voting system, by the money power. The FPP voting method which looks okay on the surface, automatically disenfranchises in a complex world over 40% of total voters. Those are the numbers, that despite good intentions, Jack wishes to further increase.

The reason that between 20 and 40% of eligible voters do not vote is that either they think it is a waste of time voting, and/ or no candidate represents their objectives. On top of that, at least 20% of voters support candidates who are bound to fail under this system because they are under a handicap, and cannot win. They are clearly disenfranchised by lack of finance.

Do like Europe - even Ireland - has done: Introduce "PR" (Proportional Representational) Elections, with the Swiss example being the best of the options. It uses the STV System, which stands for Single Transferable Votes.

(MMP is a poor substitute which lets political parties appoint various numbers of party nominees directly into Parliament.)

STV effectively allows the transfer of votes between candidates in different districts or electorates. Then when a minor party nationwide achieves a threshold of necessary votes, its highest polling candidates are elected by that transfer. It elects politicians representing all substantial schools of opinion, and greatly curtails the power of parties, as has been demonstrated in N.Z. since 1990. And please do not insult our intelligence by suggesting that joining the ranks of non-voters will ever put pressure on the corporates to change their ways or release their grip on their puppets in Parliament.

from ELECTRONZ 746
19 November 2007

www.electronz.cjb.net or email:[email protected] Copyright Electronz, 2007

Next