Guest Voice: The Grand Delusion
NOTE: The Moderate Voice from time to time runs Guest Voice posts by readers who don’t have their own website or some people who who want to present their viewpoint or just another perspective to TMV’s highly diverse readership. Guest Voice columns do not necessarily reflect the opinion of TMV or its writers. Here is another Guest Voice by Joel S. Hirschhorn who is highly critical of both parties.
The Grand Delusion
By Joel S. Hirschhorn
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 about reforms, new directions and bold new policies. The rulers need power shifting 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.
Public discontent leads to settling for less through lesser evil voting rather than bold thinking about how to reform the system to get genuine political competition and better candidates and government.
I understand why sane people would not want to vote for Republicans, based on the Bush presidency. But I cannot understand why politically engaged people think that putting Democrats in power will restore American democracy and put the welfare of non-wealthy Americans above the interests of the wealthy and the business sector. Bill Clinton’s administration strongly advanced globalization and the loss of good jobs to foreign countries. Economic inequality kept rising. Trade agreements sold us out.
And in this primary season talk about reforming our health care system among Democrats never gets serious about providing universal health care independent of the insurance industry. And why should citizens be supportive of a party that favors illegal immigration – law breaking – that primarily serves business interests by keeping labor costs low?
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. When a democracy no longer is legitimate, no longer is honest, and no longer serves the interests of ordinary citizens, then what other than violent revolution can change it? When the electoral system no longer can provide honest, corruption free candidates with any chance of winning, what can citizens do? Either stay home or just vote in local and state races and for ballot measures.
I say remove the credibility and legitimacy of the federal government by reducing voter turnout to extremely low levels. Show the world that the vast majority of Americans have seen the light and no longer are deluding themselves about their two-party democracy. A boycott on voting for candidates for federal office is a form of civil disobedience that has enormous power to force true political reforms from the political system. This is the only way to make it crystal clear that the presidency and Congress no longer represent any significant fraction of the people. This is the only way to show that America’s representative democracy is no longer representative and, therefore, is no longer a credible democracy. Just imagine a federal government trying to function in the usual ways when only 20 percent of the eligible voters actually voted.
It takes more courage to boycott voting than to vote for lesser evil Democrats and in the end this is the only way for people to feel proudly patriotic. This is the only way to not contribute to the ongoing bipartisan criminal conspiracy running the federal government.
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 nonvoters 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.
[Joel S. Hirschhorn observed the federal government firsthand as a senior official with the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment and the National Governors Association; reach him through www.delusionaldemocracy.com.]
12 Responses to “Guest Voice: The Grand Delusion”
[...] post by Joe Gandelman This was written by . Posted on Sunday, November 11, 2007, at 10:22 am. Filed under [...]
I too am dismayed by the inability (or unwillingness) of the Democrats to put the brakes on the runaway Bush train, and I too am diappointed with a process that relies disproportionately on money and power, so I certainly understand the frustration of feeling locked into a 2 party system. But despite the similarities of the parties, I think that degrees of difference are significant enough that I don’t quite see them as 2 sides of the same coin. That said, I know that many people feel held hostage to the 2 party system. But instead of advocating that people boycott voting and stop taking part in the process, how about a greater push for IRV, instant runoff voting? To my way of thinking this is the best tool for breaking the deadlock the D’s and R’s have on the system. With IRV people could rank their vote. If they were concerned about the viability of their favorite candidate, then they could list the lesser of the 2 party evils second as a precaution. In this way we could get some legitimate insight into what kind of government people really want, and also create a more level playing field.
Boycotting voting only puts more power in the hands of both party’s extremists, who will vote for their party regardless of past performance. Since the country is split 50/50 ideologically, that would only exacerbate our polarization. Maybe registering Independent would help? Jspencer’s IRV idea is an interesting one as well. Anything beats voluntary disenfranchisement.
I do agree that both parties are too influenced by special interests, and their own survival to consider the best course for the country on so many issues. Perhaps there could be a recall process for Congress.
More from this guy? Sheesh. Is he someone’s relative, maybe? Joe?
OK. Nader said he may not run, depending on who the democrats nominate. To my mind, it means he knows what most informed people do, that Edwards seems like the real thing. Saying there’s no difference between Edwards and Clinton is like saying there’s no difference between the Republicans and Democrats
Obviously everybody is corrupt. But since 9/11 the republicans have gone off the deep end, meaning there is now more than “a dime’s worth of difference” between the parties.
Hirschorn’s ideas are stupid. He has no sense of the implications of calling our political system a corrupt conspiracy. He fails to discriminate between democracy and corporatism. He conflates voting for people with buying people. He advocates the destruction of our democracy by delegitimizing it, as though nobody realizes the system is dripping with corruption.
I believe in voting. Voting works in conjunction with being a “squeaky wheel.” Vote for who you believe in, withhold your vote when they let you down, and keep up pressure to change. These are all essential ingredients: the Democrats aren’t ending the war because most dems will vote for them anyway (lesser evil) and the whole toxic anti-war = anti-soldier rhetoric puts them in a tight spot for our presspolitics.
We’re getting the government we deserve, that’s for sure. But this hirschorn guy has no clue. Ultimately, he’s arguing for passivity, which fits in well with this site’s version of “moderatism.” But the real solution is activism. Freedom is participation in power, and power abhors a vacuum. Locking yourself in a cage of passivity will just make you hopeless and more and more worthless for helping society. I mean, this hirschorn guy just reeks of depression!
Just to be clear: I think constitutional democracy is a good thing. Hirschorn thinks it’s a corrupt conspiracy.
Hirshborn hits the nail square on the head as far as stating the problem. His “solution” is a joke. When it comes down to more of the same or anyone else, I’m voting anyone else. Never in my lifetime has our democratic form of government been this close to outright dictatorship . Voting for the lesser of two evils at least buys some time to try to find a solution & get started on implementing it.
Short of armed insurrection or some form of widespread nationwide strikes, the only possible solution I see is beginning a grass roots movement to implement change starting at the local level & working our way upward. The Ron Paul campaign gives us a model we can start with. They have proven that grass roots movements can be successful, at least as far as fund raising & getting out the message is concerned. In fact, the national conversation is doing very well as long as we can keep it going beyond his candidacy.
A reminder to read our intro on guest voice posts. They do not necessarily reflect the opinion of TMV or its writers. They are columns that present an idea that could spark some interesting discussion, as this has. And, yes, we have run more than one from writers before so it is no big deal.
Which is exactly why the Conservative point of view was so powerful for a short time.
More power to the states, less power to the central government. More power to the individuals and less power to the governments.
That is the way that our nation was founded originally. Remember the articles of confederation? They worked for awhile. Loose knit states coexisting but something was missing.
Centrality of government. Okay we will give you a government…..you give us freedoms, states rights and individual guarantees of liberty.
I have preached the ops point of view for years. Both sides pat each other on the back behind the scenes while polarizing the populace in public. It is all designed to maintain the status quo and to maintain power.
Seriously…..Think about it…..The Republicans had all 3 branches of government….how many bills were passed limiting or opposing abortion, cutting welfare, creating a national religion, putting prayer back in school? By contrast when the Democrats had all three branches how many anti Republican things were forced down our throats?
The answer…..almost none…..gridlock abounds….for one reason……..the governments ever increasing need to perpetuate its own usefulness. The fashionable thing today is polarization perpetuated by the internet. It is my ever growing contention that the internet will stimulate worldwide anarchy on a scale that will boggle the mind. When facts that should remain hidden are brought to light a day of reckoning occurs. With the internet that day of reckoning is fast approaching.
ORLY?
Somebody- The states have also had problems with systemic corruption, as we have witnessed in Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kentucky and now in Alaska. Access to power and big money never mix well.
No they do not but heres the thing.
If Kentucky is corrupt and you live in Maine……..well its not your problem is it? Its Kentucky whose tax dollars are being misused. Not Maines.
The difference between me and the op is I have to believe that he is encouraging radical shifts in voter patterns. I on the other hand offer up the TRUE conservative solution.
Smaller and less intrusive government in the lives of its citizens with much greater freedom for the states to rule their citizens much in the way this country was ruled under the articles of confederation.
A strong central government whose goal is to provide security for the nation and the states who provide the services and needs of their own citizens.
We could be rid of the IRS. Replace income tax with a state income tax and allow the government to have its money via a national sales tax as well as a portion of the state income taxes.
This would force the national government to balance the budget and live within their means.
It has always been the neoconservative and the libertarians vision of a less intrusive government with more power to the states. While maintaining the central role of the government which is to secure the borders and to provide for the “common defense” of this nation.
By doing this then the states themselves are subject to the voters who are very close to home. If you want three or four or five parties vieing for votes then the states must return to prominence and not be one of 50 legs holding up an enormous government boodoggle that continues to self perpetuate itself thru ever increasing financial self interests.
Gawd!
This is like the three bears complaining about the prorridge being too hot or too cold, and then deciding that not eating, going on a permanent fast, is the best answer.
Instead of wasting time complaining, check out the platforms of the canditdates CAREFULLY, beginning at the local level, and vote CAREFULLY. Look for candidates that back your type of reforms and advocate for them.
If nobody and nothinsg fits your perfect ideals,, then wake up and smell the coffee: a perfect world does not exist.
Don’t participate, and you lose your right to complain, because you let others make the decisions for you.
Or move to a desered island, the only place society, with its institutions, is not complicated and messy.