« A Bit of Free Verse | Main | I can't believe it took more than 24 hours... »
February 14, 2006
Surviving the Terrible Twos
Choices in voting. Wow, what a concept
(From tomorrow's edition of The Pulse. A continuation of a previous blog post/discussion.)
In addition to their lovers, great numbers of our countrymen remain firmly smitten with the best interests of their respective political parties this Valentine’s Day; even more so perhaps than they are with the best interests of our country as a whole.
Being a member of the party holding the most “control” of the country’s affairs results in a vicarious feeling of power for party members, causing them to claim “victory,” having “defeated” their “opponents.” Being a member of the party on the “losing” end causes party members to seek “revenge” in their efforts to “regain control” in their quest to be on the “winning” side once again. In this era of winner-take-all and loser-blame-all partisanship, it’s sickening to realize how far we’ve fallen from the “indivisible” allegiance we all once pledged to our flag during grade school.
In an age where the American consumer has more than 50 breakfast cereals to choose from, hundreds of television channels to flip through and a plethora of churches, religious and spiritual organizations to explore, why, oh why, do we allow the fortunes of our nation to rest in the hands of but two (count ‘em) political parties hell-bent on destroying each other, thirsting for a maniacal monopoly on power and forcing upon us a dictatorially arrogant opinion of how we should live our lives? Under the increasingly farcical guises of “compassion,” “truth,” “honor” and (my favorite) “democracy,” the Republicans and Democrats bicker by day and serve each other from different sides of the same pie by night, honoring the under-the-table handshake agreement that keeps them in charge of our liberty, our loot and our lives. It is a wicked, wicked game, with the actions of party leaders slowly but surely poisoning our attitudes towards each other and eroding our will to participate in the political process.
Right now, the Republicans are in power. One day, it’ll be the Democrats. And then, the Republicans again. And then the Democrats. And so on and so on, back and forth. The pattern will repeat as it has for decades, with each resultant shift in power pulling us, the citizens, further and further apart, blurring the common ground that defines our “republic” and systematically clouding everything “for which it stands.” This cannot be allowed to continue if we are to remain a strong, inclusive nation.
Two big reasons why the Republicans and Democrats remain on top are a feeling of futility amongst voters and voter fear. Futility comes in the form of, “My vote doesn’t count, so I’m not going to bother” or “I don’t like either of them, so I’m not even going to vote.” Fear comes in the form of, “I don’t want that guy to get elected, so I’m going to vote for the other guy.” Neither of these approaches is really good for us, since they send an unhealthy message to the two major parties: If we don’t care about what they do, why should they?
I support the individual's right to seek and claim party affiliation, but I wish our people would simply think of becoming voters first without worrying so much about which party they are going to join or vote for. If each voter voted for the candidate (rather than the party) that most closely matched their convictions—their actions would reinforce (and encourage) an "everybody doing their part" mindset in this country, making all of us feel like we’re part of the political process; like all of our votes actually count.
Sure, sometimes voting our gut will result in a vote for a Republican or a Democrat. And that’s fine. But if we were to vote based solely for the man and not because of our fears or our memberships, our options would eventually improve. It’s easier to hold a single man’s feet to the fire than it is the feet of an entire party full of folks with elaborate power retention and spin policies in place. More candidate-focused voting would lead to more transparency amongst even the biggest candidates and, sigh, more honesty amongst them, too. (We don’t need them. They need to know that.) Sure, we’d lose a bunch. Our existing alternative candidates lose all the time. But with time would come progress; not only in more alternative candidates to vote for and votes for those alternatives, but in fewer and fewer votes for the status quo. The playing field could eventually be leveled. Groups of likeminded folks would start to emerge from all existing parties, propping up new, honest, principled candidates more aligned with their beliefs.
Voters in 2006 are desperate to find a reason to go to the polls--and small, steady growth by groups of people with forward-thinking, proactive ideas would be a refreshing alternative to the existing divisive vitriol that we have to maneuver around come election time. Voters need to feel like they are making an impact, not just voting for “the lesser of two evils” or for some other less-than-inspiring reason. Like marketing. Or peer pressure. Or fear. Or hate.
Maybe it’s just a pipe dream. Millions and millions of dollars are pumped into the election and re-election campaigns of the “elites,” making these candidates almost as irresistible as the newest flavor of Doritos or the latest Hollywood blockbuster. But shouldn’t that fact be enough for us to say enough already? How much can the powers-that-be really be doing for us when they’re always having to plan their next money grab in order to maintain their dynasties in spite of us? No matter how much money they have, they still can’t buy your vote. So don’t let them.
Elections are coming. Take a chance and care.
Pulse Columns | By colrus | 09:33 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://chattablogs.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/29695
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Surviving the Terrible Twos:
