Madame:
My state did not give us
more to work with. It was, with few exceptions,
a stream of the shallow or the mindlessly zealous, put into office—or back into
office—by voters that mirrored them. Multitudes
that would have voted for the better candidates—when there were ones—and easily
gotten those candidates elected, stayed diverted instead. Just like they did in the primaries.
I was less than clear
about what I meant. I did not mean get
involved in the primaries, although that is fine. I meant, get into the process where the rules
for, and likely candidates put forth, are formulated. Oftentimes, these local gatherings are quite
small and a single voice can carry greater weight. When work and direction and ideas are
inserted, it can create a momentum mix that propels better ideas and people
forward. Especially when you can bring
along 2, 3, 4, 5, or more people with you (you look even more like a force to
be reckoned with). That influence at the
micro-local party level leads to influence at the next party level, and so
on. People who bring ideas that can be
executed next time to give a great chance of winning get even more attention,
of course.
And yes, voting grants one
the right to whine with credibility! :)
While the YouTube link
you provided could be criticized by some as (self-identified though!) biased,
and in some respects it might be, it points out something important (although
it conveys it in less than clear fashion) that is missing from the mindless
bromide of “that will get the moochers/takers off their duff to get a job.”
There aren’t that many
jobs. And there are darn few good (livable
wage) ones.
The plutocratic
world-economy affects even a socially conscious place like Denmark.
Much IS redundant about
election coverage, because once again, in a mid-term election especially, we
had less than half (often far less than half) of voters turning out. For elections of people who largely have no
agenda of the common good, but only self-serving or plutocratic-serving ones. Put into power—or back into power—by barely a
fourth of the electorate, sometimes less.
As is common of
elections in the middle of a presidential term, voters tended to be older and
whiter (and race as a factor appeared not insignificant). Minorities, young people, and unmarried women
largely stayed away. Ironic, and
self-defeating, given the policies (or the obstruction thereof) that will
affect those same minorities, young people, and unmarried women.
Spending by plutocrats
and their connected organizations were steep this election, and drowned a lot of
the opposition. Dark money—the hidden
kind—was especially strong.
Many Democrats of course
fed the low turnout by their hapless, weak, evasive, self-defeating ways. I’m no particular fan of this president, for
many reasons, but to watch his own party members distance themselves from him
was nauseating, and while I might not agree with the staying away from the polls,
I could at least understand the reasoning: to Democratic voters, such Democratic
politician behavior fed apathy about candidates and lack of motivation to turn
out, and to true Independents, it appeared weak and deceptive. To Republican average voters, many of whom were oddly
sympathetic to many progressive ballot initiatives (and many of those
initiatives passed), it only confirmed their perception that Democrats aren’t
strong enough or confident enough to govern, and certainly don’t deserve
it. To Republican true believers, it
helped embolden them to turn out in droves, helped along by a media that is
always bored with sameness and instead looks for upsets, defeats, and
turnarounds, and which edged along the perception before it actually became the
reality. Rural areas, relatively
sparsely populated, tend to turn out to vote anyway, and given their sea of red
characteristics, was another factor in the rout. So was the simplistic drivel about the
election—for representatives—being solely about an “unpopular” president (whose
popularity rating is no worse than most presidents at this point). Once again, the inability of American voters
to show discernment--or to understand or care which branch budgets--led to too many voters casting their vote and choosing
their representatives because of dissatisfaction with their lives or conditions
(often economic)—which they, toddler-like, blamed on a single individual (the
president) and punished those associated by party. There was a dearth of ideas, a dearth of
values, a dearth of discussed real issues in this election, even though pressing
real ones abound. Hedges could be all
sorts of smug justified about this triumph of spectacle and shallowness, but I’m
sure he’s repulsed instead—and that’s even with his disdain for what the
Democrats have become.
Voter suppression, while
alive and well in far too many places, was not a deciding factor in hardly any
of them. The rout was that strong. By the voters who turned out. Politicians only care about citizens who
actually vote.
Democrats lick their
wounds and comfort themselves that the 2016 elections look a good deal more
favorable to them, that they will not be battling uphill, as they were this
time, in states that characteristically vote Republican. That the Republican advantage could be quite
short lived.
Some of that is real;
some delusional. Here’s why: While the
media is focused on the Senate, the plutocratic consolidation of power
continues elsewhere—in local and state elections, and in the gerrymandered
districts of the House of the Representatives.
Four truly awful governors—The Four Horsemen of the Plutocalypse—were returned
to power, some regrettable ones as well, and many newly suspect ones have
arrived, including three in traditional blue states. State legislatures have flipped to control by
the plutocratically-connected in the last few years, almost unnoticed by the
general public. As the national
legislature and governing apparatus creaks and stalls, the subtle changes to cement
plutocratic favoritism and control are happening at the state and local level. Good government will get weakened and more
feeble, while bad government will get stronger.
All because people don’t
vote, don’t care about voting, don’t get incensed about it.
Not for themselves, and
certainly not for others.
We’re a big country,
with big resources and big advantages.
But those won’t magically save us if we don’t save ourselves.
If regrettable history
is a reliable guide, only when the people have let slip their protections and
power, and/or when colossal, urgent calamity and tragedy has come upon them,
will enough turn out to attempt real change.
In the 1920s, for example, big business/loose regulation majorities
reigned. Then came the economic
catastrophe.
Until something similar,
the uninvolved Americans will deceive themselves that it either doesn’t matter
or that they can’t do anything anyway. They
will schlep from thing to thing, event to event, holiday to holiday, season to
season, but they won’t escape their deep inner dissatisfaction. Because they know they are being
irresponsible.
The above message is
brought to you by the P&H Grinch, in keeping with the irritating trend
where the holiday season keeps moving forward.
Cue up that deep voice. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment