Kervoskia
08-04-2005, 00:27
I wrote this paper, by putting many short entries and combining them into one, and I know its needs revision. I ask you if you will help me revise it by pointing out typos and critiquing my paper. After this I will share with friends and others of mine. What I would appreciate most is wherever you can, offer a witty and or sacarcastic remark so I can add that in. Thank you.
People of the States Say,"No!"
I have grown quite concerned with our current state of affairs, and I wish to change that and reveal to people howdangerously close we are to chaos. In this I shall list and explain the numerous problems and possible solutions to them. However, only the individual can change themself.
How We Arrived at Our Current State
I feel relatively creative tonight, so I thought I would discuss government, not its role or anything of that sort, but rather touch up on a different area. I will not discuss its various faults, though many there are, but alas no, that will be for another night in the very near future. I am about to discuss the power we have over government. Yes, I said it our power over the machine. It may sound all very confusing, but after a few moments of thought you will realize that I speak not of lies. We control it and it is our vehicle. Although we do not control every action of every politician, we do have the power the change it. Now, my dear readers, I am about to tell you a piece of useful knoweledge, it may sound rather odd at first but give it time; Government is our creation, it is a beast at our mercy and who exist only because of our mercy. It is not our mother, we are the parent, we can punish it and shape to our will. It may seem as if it controls us and we need it, but I assure here and now that it is quite the contrary, without us it is fated to crumble, to fall, like once mighty Rome. An institution without fellows is a shallow, empty shell without an ounce of substance. The citizenry has this very power at their fingertips, even though the majority of them are ignorant to this fact. I do not fear the government, and neither should anyone. That common fear is what keeps us enslaved and makes us look as if we are at their mercy, but again I say it is the reverse.
But why our afraid of our own creation, you may be asking yourself? I tell you it is because we have grown too dependent on it. At this point many are like new borns who cling to their mother for nourishment and care. It is our fault, we have let this happen. It has become overgrown and overzealous. How? We have entrusted the government with the responsiblity to grant us wages, labor, education, and care. It is because we do not wish to search for these needs, when there is certainly a market for them, but have ran to government pleading for its help and guidance. They grant us petty privelages and turn our money into theirs and if they can control our money, then they have a firm grip over us all. Now, there are several paths that government can take, the one path is it can become all consuming as it is becoming now, that is the path to hell, the path we have so ignorantly and joyously taken. To this very day that is the path we choose to tread, even when its devastating effects have been pointed out to us by those few who saw its numerous plagues it can cast over us all with its iron arms. We can change this, we can take it and shatter it into a thousand pieces! But, nay I do not suggest that. That is the path toward anarchism, which, at maximum, last only a few hours to a few days before a tyrant rose to power. We must not allow that, that would only place us back into reach of the iron arms of large government, or the entity as I refer to call it, surely we are intelligent enough to avoid anarchism.
In my honest opinion a good government is one that is easily controlled, or one as Thomas Jefferson suggest. A small, limited government who can focus on administering the law and does not dictate the market, but rather lets it proceed down its natural course. One that would allow the maximum amount freedom without it causing libertarianism in its most extreme form. (We musn't allow other people to harm other people's freedom- that is the purpose of law in a part.) How can we achieve this government? By two means, voting and their wallet. If you can harm their wallet they will do what they can do regain its plentiful contents. We must not be so depenedent on the, we must tell them we can walk as a toddler says to his parents. We must not take its tempations, such as handouts. Voting is a valuable tool. We can change the regime and put one in place that we can manage if it grows to large or goes awry. After we achive that we can move on from that point. Do not buy into the indoctrination and handouts, say ," No, I will take responsibility for my own life. I neither desire nor require your welfare."Again I am not proposing anarchism and look down upon that idea.(far too impractical) Peaceful protests are another mean. Not by violence, the most efficient way to extinguish a fire is by water. The government is a bonfire and we are a wave- we must turn make the fire smaller or else it will spread. People, however, often do not vote. They take it for granted, but if it is threatened they will rise. Of course we must not let it reach that stage. Watch out for propaganda for instance, the Big Two say theywish to "take the country back", but for whom and from whom? They wish to take it back from eachother, they fight for control, they wish to keep it for themselves. One of the firsy things we must do is admit that this problem is our doing, we have neglected it to such am extent that it is like this now. By this way, we will not reach a more Orwellian state.
Voting and Democracy
I have decided that on the issue of voting that I made my explanation far too vague and in this post I will further prod the issue.Voting is one of our most powerful and potent of all our political and social tools. With it we can uphold the current manifestations and regime or we may choose to reverse them and topple the regime.- a minirature revolution if you will. It is a version of a peaceful protest, each one vote a signal to the leaders in power, of course as we know politicians can be bought and sold so this poses as a challenge. If we accept full responsiblity for our actions and our grave mistake of making a nanny out of a jackel, then we may change our course before it is too late.However, many people, young people, do not exercise this right. They often feel that it is to no affect if they neglect to exercise it, or that their voices are being muffled and see no use in taking part in our Republic in the democratic fashion. This is the curse of apathy, one that is charateristic, to my dismay, in our society. People believe this right will be free to do for all time and with no restrictions. That, dear fellows, is an overly optimistic and naive view of it. It is untrue, by ignoring the right to vote and not freely exericising it we are sending the message that we do not care what the government does, that they may do they will when they will, no further inquiries.
Not only does it do this, but a great deal more. Somewhere two-hundred million citizens may vote, but in the previous election cycle only around one-hundred and twelve million participated. That is a disappointing number. By doing this your voice is not heard and you are basically allowing other voters to choose your leaders for you, and when the election is over you complain but place no blame on yourself because you did not partake in the process, which you are more at fault than if you did participate. Moving further along, I shall make mention of the feeling of hopelessness. People feel they are not being heard and that their government is looking down their noses on them, this is people who vote mind you. If someone cannot hear you, yell your message louder, be vocal. However, what if the politician refuses to listen? Well then you protest, peacefully is affective, you be persistant and show them as I have told you that the government is at your mercy and make them realize that. But, in politics a certain level of cynicism is required because politics is one of the largest and mosr destructive outlet for corruption ever contrived by man and if you see not the cynicism in it, then you needn't be in it or you are not looking close enough.
Political Character
In this next part, the character and ineffeciveness of a polarized democracy will be discussed.. I was reminded of a play by Theather of the Absurd called Rosencratz and Guildenstern are Dead. On reading a brief statement about it, I saw the relavence in applying it to our day. You see they come upon deep philosophical truths and discoveres, only to have them fade away into the darkness moments later. We do this as well, especially in politics, yes its another post about politics. The politicians, in all their bickering and deep tone of cynicism, come upon viable solutions to actual problems, but they few are far between. Unfortunately, before it can be put up for furthrt discussion, it turns into a debate. People disagree on how it should be done and when and why and other such inquiries. One side believes this is the most effective way to implement it, the other believes the other way is far more effective. Soon the entire idea and its following concepts are thus drowned in a black a pool of detail and argument. It is because of this that we lose sight of what works most effectively and efficiently. One must have it their way ,and quite often, must have it no other way. We must come to a sensible agreement and join together rather than arguing over who is right and who is wrong, stop pointing the finger as it were. This is not just politicians, but everyone and it is an extremely difficult cycle to escape from. Now, I take issue with their contradictions. I have heard a few Republicans express their distaste with his decision, saying that it is unconstitutional that the state is interfering. They said it was family affair. I have to agree with them. This was a family affair and the government had no right to reverse the decisions of the courts. Mr. Schiavo is her legal guardian and as such he can order the feeding tube removed. Bush claims to be for smaller government, but this is extremely contradictory to his rhetoric. If he truly was for smaller government he would have let the decision be, he would not have used his power to change the decision in his favor. He is also letting his so-called pro-life stance interfere. His view is that if it is uncertain if a person is alive or dead, you must always sway to the side of life. Another example of hypocracy is, which Rev. Sharpton pointed out, what about death row cases where it is unsure if the person is guilty. According to the rhetoric we must sway to the side of life, but that is not the case. To be rather direct, he is doing one action and saying something entirely contradictory. If you are truly for life you will sway to the side of life in death row cases. If he is truly for small government he would tell the government to stop dictating morality, this forms a state morality and it is placed on everyone.
Polarization and Our Democracy
As you know there are two major parties, what you may not know is there exist a great deal of others such as the Libertarian, Constitution, Socialist, and Green to name only a few. Be that as it may many people group others only into Democrat and Republican. To so many of the voting population only these exist and only these matter, currently the major parties hold all the power and influence. This brings about an aisle of stereotypes, for example all Democrats have mainly liberal views and Republicans mainly conservative ones. In effect this causes the traditional, and highly flawed, left-right scale. To those who recognize it as accurate people are grouped and put into these too few categories. The government as well as the mainstream media accept this. One proof of this is the Red State-Blue State system used during elections. People become so attached to these labels that it contributes to political, and social and economic, polarization. They are overwhelmed by ideologues and in the process become fanatics. ( a few include Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Alan Colmes, and Sean Hannity )
Labels are dangerous, you can call peoples views liberal or conservative, libertarian, etc. because that can be accurate, but when you label the person then it becomes difficult to reason with each other. Parties are the same. One should vote for a party, not join one. People identify themselves politically, usually by a certain party. Parties are for politicians, not for the average citizen or pundint. Doing the opposite will only cause a higher, and possibly more harmful, degree of seperation. To my original point, most politicos ignore people who tend to have ideas that sway from the mainstream, and if no one hears about them, then people think these are the only valid and existing views. The media again plays a part in polarization. There are so many sources for news that people can choose. The vast majority of the time it is with media who share similar views. Again this brings about the birth of ideologues. We must see other views or else we will be engulfed by our own and blinded from rationality.
To end this horrifying state of affairs, I say we need but say, "No!"
People of the States Say,"No!"
I have grown quite concerned with our current state of affairs, and I wish to change that and reveal to people howdangerously close we are to chaos. In this I shall list and explain the numerous problems and possible solutions to them. However, only the individual can change themself.
How We Arrived at Our Current State
I feel relatively creative tonight, so I thought I would discuss government, not its role or anything of that sort, but rather touch up on a different area. I will not discuss its various faults, though many there are, but alas no, that will be for another night in the very near future. I am about to discuss the power we have over government. Yes, I said it our power over the machine. It may sound all very confusing, but after a few moments of thought you will realize that I speak not of lies. We control it and it is our vehicle. Although we do not control every action of every politician, we do have the power the change it. Now, my dear readers, I am about to tell you a piece of useful knoweledge, it may sound rather odd at first but give it time; Government is our creation, it is a beast at our mercy and who exist only because of our mercy. It is not our mother, we are the parent, we can punish it and shape to our will. It may seem as if it controls us and we need it, but I assure here and now that it is quite the contrary, without us it is fated to crumble, to fall, like once mighty Rome. An institution without fellows is a shallow, empty shell without an ounce of substance. The citizenry has this very power at their fingertips, even though the majority of them are ignorant to this fact. I do not fear the government, and neither should anyone. That common fear is what keeps us enslaved and makes us look as if we are at their mercy, but again I say it is the reverse.
But why our afraid of our own creation, you may be asking yourself? I tell you it is because we have grown too dependent on it. At this point many are like new borns who cling to their mother for nourishment and care. It is our fault, we have let this happen. It has become overgrown and overzealous. How? We have entrusted the government with the responsiblity to grant us wages, labor, education, and care. It is because we do not wish to search for these needs, when there is certainly a market for them, but have ran to government pleading for its help and guidance. They grant us petty privelages and turn our money into theirs and if they can control our money, then they have a firm grip over us all. Now, there are several paths that government can take, the one path is it can become all consuming as it is becoming now, that is the path to hell, the path we have so ignorantly and joyously taken. To this very day that is the path we choose to tread, even when its devastating effects have been pointed out to us by those few who saw its numerous plagues it can cast over us all with its iron arms. We can change this, we can take it and shatter it into a thousand pieces! But, nay I do not suggest that. That is the path toward anarchism, which, at maximum, last only a few hours to a few days before a tyrant rose to power. We must not allow that, that would only place us back into reach of the iron arms of large government, or the entity as I refer to call it, surely we are intelligent enough to avoid anarchism.
In my honest opinion a good government is one that is easily controlled, or one as Thomas Jefferson suggest. A small, limited government who can focus on administering the law and does not dictate the market, but rather lets it proceed down its natural course. One that would allow the maximum amount freedom without it causing libertarianism in its most extreme form. (We musn't allow other people to harm other people's freedom- that is the purpose of law in a part.) How can we achieve this government? By two means, voting and their wallet. If you can harm their wallet they will do what they can do regain its plentiful contents. We must not be so depenedent on the, we must tell them we can walk as a toddler says to his parents. We must not take its tempations, such as handouts. Voting is a valuable tool. We can change the regime and put one in place that we can manage if it grows to large or goes awry. After we achive that we can move on from that point. Do not buy into the indoctrination and handouts, say ," No, I will take responsibility for my own life. I neither desire nor require your welfare."Again I am not proposing anarchism and look down upon that idea.(far too impractical) Peaceful protests are another mean. Not by violence, the most efficient way to extinguish a fire is by water. The government is a bonfire and we are a wave- we must turn make the fire smaller or else it will spread. People, however, often do not vote. They take it for granted, but if it is threatened they will rise. Of course we must not let it reach that stage. Watch out for propaganda for instance, the Big Two say theywish to "take the country back", but for whom and from whom? They wish to take it back from eachother, they fight for control, they wish to keep it for themselves. One of the firsy things we must do is admit that this problem is our doing, we have neglected it to such am extent that it is like this now. By this way, we will not reach a more Orwellian state.
Voting and Democracy
I have decided that on the issue of voting that I made my explanation far too vague and in this post I will further prod the issue.Voting is one of our most powerful and potent of all our political and social tools. With it we can uphold the current manifestations and regime or we may choose to reverse them and topple the regime.- a minirature revolution if you will. It is a version of a peaceful protest, each one vote a signal to the leaders in power, of course as we know politicians can be bought and sold so this poses as a challenge. If we accept full responsiblity for our actions and our grave mistake of making a nanny out of a jackel, then we may change our course before it is too late.However, many people, young people, do not exercise this right. They often feel that it is to no affect if they neglect to exercise it, or that their voices are being muffled and see no use in taking part in our Republic in the democratic fashion. This is the curse of apathy, one that is charateristic, to my dismay, in our society. People believe this right will be free to do for all time and with no restrictions. That, dear fellows, is an overly optimistic and naive view of it. It is untrue, by ignoring the right to vote and not freely exericising it we are sending the message that we do not care what the government does, that they may do they will when they will, no further inquiries.
Not only does it do this, but a great deal more. Somewhere two-hundred million citizens may vote, but in the previous election cycle only around one-hundred and twelve million participated. That is a disappointing number. By doing this your voice is not heard and you are basically allowing other voters to choose your leaders for you, and when the election is over you complain but place no blame on yourself because you did not partake in the process, which you are more at fault than if you did participate. Moving further along, I shall make mention of the feeling of hopelessness. People feel they are not being heard and that their government is looking down their noses on them, this is people who vote mind you. If someone cannot hear you, yell your message louder, be vocal. However, what if the politician refuses to listen? Well then you protest, peacefully is affective, you be persistant and show them as I have told you that the government is at your mercy and make them realize that. But, in politics a certain level of cynicism is required because politics is one of the largest and mosr destructive outlet for corruption ever contrived by man and if you see not the cynicism in it, then you needn't be in it or you are not looking close enough.
Political Character
In this next part, the character and ineffeciveness of a polarized democracy will be discussed.. I was reminded of a play by Theather of the Absurd called Rosencratz and Guildenstern are Dead. On reading a brief statement about it, I saw the relavence in applying it to our day. You see they come upon deep philosophical truths and discoveres, only to have them fade away into the darkness moments later. We do this as well, especially in politics, yes its another post about politics. The politicians, in all their bickering and deep tone of cynicism, come upon viable solutions to actual problems, but they few are far between. Unfortunately, before it can be put up for furthrt discussion, it turns into a debate. People disagree on how it should be done and when and why and other such inquiries. One side believes this is the most effective way to implement it, the other believes the other way is far more effective. Soon the entire idea and its following concepts are thus drowned in a black a pool of detail and argument. It is because of this that we lose sight of what works most effectively and efficiently. One must have it their way ,and quite often, must have it no other way. We must come to a sensible agreement and join together rather than arguing over who is right and who is wrong, stop pointing the finger as it were. This is not just politicians, but everyone and it is an extremely difficult cycle to escape from. Now, I take issue with their contradictions. I have heard a few Republicans express their distaste with his decision, saying that it is unconstitutional that the state is interfering. They said it was family affair. I have to agree with them. This was a family affair and the government had no right to reverse the decisions of the courts. Mr. Schiavo is her legal guardian and as such he can order the feeding tube removed. Bush claims to be for smaller government, but this is extremely contradictory to his rhetoric. If he truly was for smaller government he would have let the decision be, he would not have used his power to change the decision in his favor. He is also letting his so-called pro-life stance interfere. His view is that if it is uncertain if a person is alive or dead, you must always sway to the side of life. Another example of hypocracy is, which Rev. Sharpton pointed out, what about death row cases where it is unsure if the person is guilty. According to the rhetoric we must sway to the side of life, but that is not the case. To be rather direct, he is doing one action and saying something entirely contradictory. If you are truly for life you will sway to the side of life in death row cases. If he is truly for small government he would tell the government to stop dictating morality, this forms a state morality and it is placed on everyone.
Polarization and Our Democracy
As you know there are two major parties, what you may not know is there exist a great deal of others such as the Libertarian, Constitution, Socialist, and Green to name only a few. Be that as it may many people group others only into Democrat and Republican. To so many of the voting population only these exist and only these matter, currently the major parties hold all the power and influence. This brings about an aisle of stereotypes, for example all Democrats have mainly liberal views and Republicans mainly conservative ones. In effect this causes the traditional, and highly flawed, left-right scale. To those who recognize it as accurate people are grouped and put into these too few categories. The government as well as the mainstream media accept this. One proof of this is the Red State-Blue State system used during elections. People become so attached to these labels that it contributes to political, and social and economic, polarization. They are overwhelmed by ideologues and in the process become fanatics. ( a few include Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, Alan Colmes, and Sean Hannity )
Labels are dangerous, you can call peoples views liberal or conservative, libertarian, etc. because that can be accurate, but when you label the person then it becomes difficult to reason with each other. Parties are the same. One should vote for a party, not join one. People identify themselves politically, usually by a certain party. Parties are for politicians, not for the average citizen or pundint. Doing the opposite will only cause a higher, and possibly more harmful, degree of seperation. To my original point, most politicos ignore people who tend to have ideas that sway from the mainstream, and if no one hears about them, then people think these are the only valid and existing views. The media again plays a part in polarization. There are so many sources for news that people can choose. The vast majority of the time it is with media who share similar views. Again this brings about the birth of ideologues. We must see other views or else we will be engulfed by our own and blinded from rationality.
To end this horrifying state of affairs, I say we need but say, "No!"