Meet the new boss...same as the old boss (623 hits)
Category: NoneRating: -0.29 on 7 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Cuberat (View user info) at 2004-08-31 16:54:12 EDT
I didn't really want my first post on Ubersite to be a political one, however, the recent posts by SpikeGoddess http://www.ubersite.com/m/43546 and Teephpah http://www.ubersite.com/m/42396 regarding protests at the RNC have motivated me.
I find that, while I agree with both of you, I also disagree with both of you.
My title basically expresses the maxim which will be the center of this post. In the post I referenced above, Teephpah has shown what appears to be correct. The Republican and Democratic Parties are both inconsistent in their ideologies. To briefly recap the idea I am referring to, it was stated that there is a logical inconsistency between the fiscal and social policies of each of the political parties.
This logical inconsistency is just a tool of the politicians. If we look back to the founding fathers, in their time, in the time of the founding of this nation, politicians were not men who made their careers from politics. They were men (and eventually women) who looked upon their political work as a "civic duty".
That being said, we must look at those who "represent" (and I use that term loosely) us in today's government. Most (if not all) of these individuals are persons who have made politics their life's career. These are individuals who are in politics to make a living.
As a sidebar, I realize that some of you will respond that not everyone gets into politics for money. I realize that, however, it has been stated by many in office (after their careers are over, of course) that it is almost impossible to get anything done without taking money or throwing it around. This is why PACs have become so strong. However, I digress.
From looking at our politicians today, one can surmise that most (again, if not all) are rather wealthy. Many are of a rather ripe old age. Now you and I, the young people of this country, we have to ask: "what do they have in common with me that could possibly give them enough understanding to represent me in our government?"
With all of the wisdom of my 24 years, and all of the education I have received, I can provide you with only one answer:
Nothing. Nada. Zilch. Zero.
I agree that the protestors are wasting their breath, and making themselves look like fools out there. They are doing what they can within the system.
That is where they are wrong.
The system needs to change. Now before you turn a deaf ear to me thinking I am some kind of "commy-pinko-radical-fundamentalist-terrorist" who wants to bring down our government, let me clarify. I believe that our SYSTEM of government is the best in the world. The founding fathers managed to create a system which I believe will outlast any other on earth.
With that said, the founders did not count on the sort of corruption we have today. When indeed we have only two parties to choose from, and in reality the two are really just one and the same.
The point has been made that both political parties claim that the other owns the media. That is because they both own and control the media. Look at both sides. Both sides take contributions from someone. Both sides get lobbied by someone. Who actually comes out the winner on any given issue? The people with the deepest pockets.
The NRA buys the Republicans. The pharmaceutical companies buy the Democrats. The list goes on. No matter what, today's politicians are in somebody's pockets.
What does this mean for the rest of us? Only one thing. We need to change the system. Not the system of government, the status quo of politicians who are in office based on their own greed.
It wont be easy. But we need to first start by voting this election. If possible, by voting for a "third-party candidate". Then we need to hold our elected officials accountable for what they do in office.
Come time for next election, some of US need to step up to the plate. It is, and was intended to be a sacrifice to serve your civic duty. It was never intended to be a life-long career which made people wealthy.
We may be ill prepared. We may not have much to start with. But the new revolution's warning shots will (hopefully) be fired in November. Hopefully, change is near.
User Reviews
Submitted by Sirous (user info) at 2004-08-31 18:03:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
Good points of view but fundamentally flawed. The president may be elected but his cabinet is the ones who run things. When you elect a President you should look at who he will be electing as his cabinet more than what his stances are. Think about the past few presidents and tell me I am wrong, it has been the cabinet that is making life miserable for us. They are the ones that hold the power.
Submitted by johnson (user info) at 2004-08-31 18:03:17 EDT (#)
Ranking: -2
Definately very wrong. The Democrats and Republicans are run by the same corporations that play an "even spread". The DNC and RNC are both funded by the same people. That's why politics doesn't matter, because the upper-class is firmly in control no matter what party is in power.
Also, the NRA is not a corporation.
Submitted by Gent (user info) at 2004-08-31 17:21:59 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
I think this was a good effort, but again lacked the substance to offer any real solution. Is there truly a need for a mulitple party system, or is two enough, providing we have a number of candidates from whom to choose from each representing unique viewpoints, but still under either the GOP or Democractic moniker. After all, those two parties each contain vastly different individuals with vastly different ideas, even within the party itself.
I think the notion that you put forth to get involved is the right one. When different viewpoints start becoming represented within the major parties, splinter parties will naturally result. And you will have the multi-party system you're looking for. People who claim they don't have the financial means necessary to enter politics are using it as an excuse, because on the local level, it isn't necessary. And as you progress from the local level, the means will be provided.
Here are some other things of note I've found in your piece:
You write: "I find that, while I agree with both of you, I also disagree with both of you."
-Sounds like you have the politics thing down well... straddling both sides of the arguement.
You write- "The NRA buys the Republicans. The pharmaceutical companies buy the Democrats. The list goes on. No matter what, today's politicians are in somebody's pockets."
-That claim may or may not be true, but it is stereotypical arguement. The following link will take you to one of my posts were I'll post an excerpt from an article from the New Republic that talks about the terrible influence that drug companies have had on our current, Republican administration. I don't know what it says about the overall picture of politicians, but it paints a pretty bad picture of the GOP:
http://www.ubersite.com/cgi-bin/message_get.cgi?message=109344541568511571#769070
Submitted by charger (user info) at 2004-08-31 17:16:01 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
Logically flawed. The corporations don't care if the government is Republican, Democrat, Green or Green Martians. The money will flow to the power, whoever the power is. The desire to win, inate in anyone who would consider running for office, will be drawn to the money and will compromise whatever ideals they may have to get that money.
Term limits mean nothing. The corporations will simply buy new Reps and Senators. Sure, it will make it a tiny bit harder - the PACS, corporations and special interests will have to look up a new name every few years rather than writing a check to the same person every election - but the difference isn't worth much.
Submitted by ASSMAN (user info) at 2004-08-31 17:07:51 EDT (#)
Ranking: 0
It wont be easy. But we need to first start by voting this election. If possible, by voting for a "third-party candidate". Then we need to hold our elected officials accountable for what they do in office.
----------------------------------------
Then we'll have three parties in the pockets of corporations and special interest groups...
we need term limits on Congress. Make them actually do something to make a diffrence in the 4 years or 12 years they are allowed to be in office. If they were term limited they wouldn't have to worry about getting money to be re elected and they could focus on some good. Also being in Congress should be less about making money and more about making a diffrence. They should have to live in a dorm and only get paid when they leave office.
Submitted by Midnight_Laydee (user info) at 2004-08-31 17:00:48 EDT (#)
Ranking: 1
Nearly gave up on reading past the 2nd or 3rd paragraph but persevered coz i generally don't know a lot about American politics and was interested...and found that i do know more than i thought. Well put you. And good luck on changing the system, it's gonna take a long time. In the UK there are a lot more parties to choose from but we're not really in any better a situation. Think it might just be better to scrap it all and start over, but that's not really ever gonna happen.
Submitted by boomslang (user info) at 2004-08-31 16:56:47 EDT (#)
Ranking: -1
"The NRA buys the Republicans. The pharmaceutical companies buy the Democrats. The list goes on. No matter what, today's politicians are in somebody's pockets."
You are aware that the NRA is not a corporation right? Also, you should know that these corporations (especially pharmaceuticals) have enough money to give to both parties and do just that.