| The Two-Party Illusion
“There
is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two
great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures
in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, is to be
dreaded as the greatest political evil.” - John Adams
March 01, 2016 "Information Clearing House" - "International Man" - The
Great Illusion of the two-party system is that it allows the voter a
choice – usually between a liberal and a conservative government. The
reality is that, whichever party wins the election, the government is,
in truth, a totalitarian one. The “choice” is a mere distraction from
the true objective.
Recently,
an American college student, Justin Snyder, commented on his choice for
his country’s next president and his reasons for it. Mister Snyder
said, in part,
"I
support Hillary Clinton for president … When you add up her knowhow,
leadership, and experience, it's clear that Hillary Clinton is a perfect
fit to be the commander-in-chief of the largest military the world has
ever seen … The thing is, we've been trying the free market thing for
centuries. All we have to show for it is a super wealthy class of people
who run the country. What we need is someone to represent the common
man, and that someone is Hillary Rodham Clinton.”
Mister
Snyder has done quite well in absorbing the modern liberal party line,
one that both advances itself on the concept of collectivism, yet
reverses itself on its position just two generations ago that war is an
evil concept, promoted by conservatives in an effort to control the
world.
His
comments are not unusual, and that’s what makes them significant. He’s a
modern, educated, effectively indoctrinated liberal. His political
counterpart is a modern, educated, effectively indoctrinated
conservative. Together, they comprise the backbone of governmental
dominance over a people: different party, same blind acceptance of
political party dogma.
John
Adams had it right in his 1780 letter to Jonathan Jackson, as quoted
above. He understood that the old method of thought control – that of
kings ordering their vassals what to believe – had had its day. It had
never been fully effective, as the vassal was free to decide whether he
believed the king. But, as early as 1780, the future would belong to
those politicians who were skilled in giving the public “A” and “B”
choices.People need to believe that they have a choice. Interestingly, though, they seem to be content with only two choices. A skilled politician therefore limits the number of choices to two and, today, this is the way it’s done in most “advanced” countries. Whether it’s Democrat vs. Republican, or Tory vs. Labour, there are two dominant parties. Each is represented by a group of individuals seeking to gain or maintain public office.
Initially,
in order to sell the two-party concept to voters, it’s important for
each party to have a philosophical identity. These two identities would
seem to need to be based on opposing primary principles or ideologies,
such as a free market system vs. collectivism, or empire-building
warfare vs. a commitment to peace.
The
US did, indeed, follow this route in developing its own primary sports
teams, the Democrats and the Republicans. And, along the way, it learned
that the public can be best manipulated if they are blindly devoted to
either one team or the other. (Those in the red T-shirts detest those in
the blue, and vice versa.)
Once
this blind devotion has been achieved, it becomes possible to dispense
with the extreme polarity of principles and ideology. As stated above,
only two generations ago, there was a “collectivism and peace” party and
a “free market and empire” party in the US. What they had in common,
however, was that both required an increasingly larger government to
support its objectives.
Today,
the US political system has evolved to the point that the principles
and ideology are disappearing. Today, Democrats fully accept and even
encourage overseas aggression. This has been achieved through the
illusion of “terrorism.” Similarly, the Republicans have watered down
their commitment to a free market system through the soma of
ever-widening entitlements.
No
longer is it necessary that the two dogmas are polar opposites. They
can only be five degrees apart from each other, yet each team of
supporters fully believes his team is morally right and the other team
is morally wrong. Meanwhile, they’re both headed toward the same
warfare/welfare end. And of course, both teams fully accept the concept
that an ever-expanding government role is necessary in achieving these ends.
But
how is it possible that the principles and ideologies have been
virtually erased? After all, the very idea of principles is that they
are not based on popularity, but on inner conviction. Well, truth be
told, the great majority of people have no real moral compass at all;
no real inner sense of convictions. Their convictions can be
manipulated in such a way that the portion of the brain that wishes to
deal with convictions can be redirected into areas that are of little
consequence.
On
the surface of it, this seems like a bold and even radical statement,
yet, as we can readily see, as long as never-ending debates are
maintained over the less vital issues, such as abortion rights, gay
rights, etc., a people can be distracted away from primary principles.
Therefore, the government has the ability to create the illusion that a
two-party system exists when, in truth, as the caption below the above
photo states,
“VOTING: It’s deciding which criminal gets to steal everything you have.”
The concept of a government as a body of individuals that are chosen by election to represent the
voters is a good one, but it’s not a concept that’s shared by those who
are elected. Those who are elected almost unanimously see the concept
as one in which the rulers are
determined. They have no illusion about representation, although they
do understand that they must give the impression to voters that they see
themselves as representatives. Rulers seek to rule. All other concerns are secondary.
Over
time, those elected will look for every opportunity to increase their
own power (both politically and economically). Consequently, the longer a
governmental system exists in a given country, the more it will
deteriorate toward tyranny.
At
some point, there is, in almost every country, a rebellion of some sort
that causes a reset – a return to a more democratic structure where a
greater level of representation once again takes place. Then the
deterioration, inexorably, begins anew. This is why Thomas Jefferson was
so fervent that, every so often, a revolution is essential.
It
should be pointed out that the US is not alone in this deterioration.
In all fairness, many other countries are in a similar state.
Increasingly, people in these countries recognise that conditions are
becoming tyrannical. Yet, most hold out the hope that the next election
will somehow magically result in a return to basic freedoms.This will not be the case.
Deterioration is baked in the cake. Regardless of the candidate,
regardless of the party, regardless of the country, the outcome will be
the same.
But,
as stated previously, the deterioration process is a very long one and,
at any given time in history, there are countries that are not so far
along in the process. A bright future does indeed exist, but it lies not
in the hope of a reversal by political leaders. It lies in choosing
one’s domicile – one where basic freedoms remain.
Jeff
Thomas is British and resides in the Caribbean. The son of an economist
and historian, he learned early to be distrustful of governments as a
general principle. Although he spent his career creating and developing
businesses, for eight years, he penned a weekly newspaper column on the
theme of limiting government.
© 2016 Casey Research, LLC.
|
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
The Two-Party Illusion
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment