Sunday, September 14, 2008

Undecided idiots or Independent patriots?

A long while ago I posted on my own blog evidence of the visceral hatred I have for those that cannot decide the most important issues of their lifetime. In that post I pointed out that the mushy middle may very well be the catalyst for the problems that we find ourselves in today. Indecision or lack of knowledge on any given issue by any of these rail sitters merely puts more pressure on government officials who are charged with doing the bidding of their constituents.
This becomes more apparent when looked at through the prism of this years election.

I forgot about this until I recently had a discussion with a friend who told me he was thinking about voting for Obama, until McCain picked Palin as a running mate. He does not like McCain, but thinks Palin is the answer. He thinks Obama may be a muslim, and does not seem to care about policy.
He has voted in every major election.
He is afraid we will be attacked again.

On the other hand I work with a gentleman that had until the last eight years regarded politics as something other people pay attention to. He didn't vote until eight years ago.
I have noticed when traveling through his work station that he was listening to the news on his satellite radio. Without question this is a full turnaround from those years ago, when he would be more involved with trivia questions on an oldies music station, than the speeches of both the Democratic, and Republican presidential nominee.
He voted Republican in the last two elections.
He is worried about the economy.

-Agnosticrat

I can understand Agnosticrat's anger with so-called undecided voters but yet I find myself sympathizing with them, sometimes it would be nice to not feel so invested in whether one side wins an idealogical debate. I don't agree with the media fascination with them since I often wonder how many of them really vote. I also wonder how many of them vote based on anything more than an infantile "gut" reaction about who would be a good beer drinking pal or who's church attendance is most likely to inspire "morality" despite numerous examples of horribly crooked scoundrels who fooled a nation into seeing them as folksy and pious.

What scares me more aren't the people who may be seriously conflicted about which political party best represents them (for instance, a person who opposes the drug war but doesn't like the Republican theological wing, someone who is bothered by the idea that Democrats seemingly prefer Government solutions to private ones, or the person who wants government to help out people who need it in times of crisis but think life begins at conception and that abortion is murder) but it's the people who walk into the voting booth having no idea of who they support and end up just flipping a switch.

The fact that some people feel compelled to vote even when they seem to have no over-riding interest in the issues involved or a deep passion for who should win, makes me wonder why they don't just stay home. I don't care for the get out the vote messages that insist everyone HAS to go vote or the men who died at Normandy will have given their lives for naught. Some people just don't have a grasp of the issues or care much for what happens and therefore should be perfectly entitled to just "sit it out" if that is what they choose.

- Pol Watcher


Well that is kind of a pop answer isn't it?
Vote because someone died for you to have the ability to.

It really turns into a beast when you place lives as the cost of war as reason for anything. After all any responsibility we have as citizens, can and to some degree has been, sold through this kind of ultra-patriotism. From
buying war bonds during previous wars, to joining the peace corps in the sixties, and voting. At some point the fact that people died for this right sounds like less of an ideology, than it does a slogan. Even the most ardent of patriots must admit that through over use, the phrase may have lost some of it's meaning. None the less it has till now shown itself to be a less than stellar call to action in getting the people to the polls

The answer in this case may not be brandishing the lives of those that fought so hard in the past, but must be (in my opinion) showing the voter that they are on the front lines in their own fight. That their own actions now, (rather than someone else's actions then) are the real meaning of patriotism. That they must fight for this democracy with ballots, and information every bit as hard as our forefathers did with muskets, and tanks.

In the early eighties there was a movement among minority activists to tell children that education was a legal right, but that they must demand it from the people in charge of teaching them. It taught the fact that they were being denied the right of an education through a system that seemed to expect apathy from both students, and parents alike.
It was successful.

Get out the vote, as far as I can see uses this to some extent in order to get people at the polling place, but with nothing more than a cursory knowledge of the facts concerning the candidates, (gathered most likely from television talking points), you will end up with at least one of the examples I pointed to before. Growing the will to learn more in depth what each candidate stands for, is the only way to beat the expectation of apathy from the system.

That expectation is that voters will be turned off when discussing anything more than lipstick on pigs, and who may be a secret Muslim. All of this in concert with those that would rather instill fears of a fixed system. That they all are crooks, and it is better to vote for the lesser of two evils, has got to have an effect on anyone may want to have more of a stake in the affairs of government, but have the idea that simply asking how, when, and where to get involved, may lead to derision.

Today I saw a talking head on television say that political forums in which each candidate answers questions separately is boring, and that voters can't wait until the melee brought on by the debates. It made me sick to my stomach to think there was someone that may have tuned in to one of the forums to hear what the candidates would have to say, but chose instead to watch a re-run on television, or almost anything but watch and listen to serious questions being put to the candidates.

-Agnosticrat


I'm glad you brought up education, because I think the one thing I can point to most responsible for the failures of our elected leaders is the failure of our educational institutions. Simply, the American people have lost all capacity to have a rational debate based on a thorough understanding of history, rhetoric and philosophy of government. We have a mass media that has replaced culture, we have pop trivia which has replaced a thoughtful understanding of complex issues. Our political debates are sound byte shout-fests made to grab attention and ratings.

The most important thing I ever learned in school was a college course in which we discussed fallacious arguments. The ability to see through a bullshit argument that relies of absurd reduction, straw man tactics or other cheap debate stunts is something every single citizen of our democracy must have. Too many people fall for the emotional line of argument Agnosticrat mentions in which people base their vote on the worship practices (or lack thereof) of the candidate. How many people stupidly fall for a small snippet of dialogue chopped completely out of context to make it sound like someone said something they didn't say (this elementary school tactic is a favorite of simple minds)?

The American educational system is too often devoted to producing good workers for our factories instead of good citizens for our democracy. I happen to think if we concentrated on producing a citizenry capable of free thinking and rational discourse we'd not only have the democracy we desire but our economy would benefit as well.

As much as the founding generation freed this nation from the tyranny of a brutal monarch with muskets, it was also the product of the Enlightenment and the power of the pen in the hands of an educated class that respected the right of people to be capable of rational thought and to come to the right conclusions, to stay engaged in the ongoing argument that is the constantly evolving idea of the United Stated of America. Every ballot cast is another musket aimed at the heart of the forces of tyranny that potentially would tear asunder this nation conceived in liberty. However, an uninformed voter is just shooting wildly into the crowd while it takes some thought and consideration to aim the vote in the right direction.

- Pol Watcher

5 comments:

el grillo said...

PW said:
"Every ballot cast is another musket aimed at the heart of the forces of tyranny that potentially would tear asunder this nation conceived in liberty."
This so pretty that I need some organ music in the background, playing "onward christian soldiers", to a fife and drum accompaniment.

While I respect the aged warriors that were duped into risking death to benefit something or other for the tyrants on both sides, I have to point out that the guys who have died (or worse yet, were only maimed for life, physically and emotionally) in what we worship as "The Wars to End All Wars" actually did die and return maimed "for naught"! Otherwise, we wouldn't be rushing all over the globe with our hair on fire threatening to start more wars as our only national option for conflict resolution. Red ads wouldn't be scoffing at the notion of non-military solutions as "surrender". We wouldn't be continuing our aggression in the search for some mysterious definition of "victory". Even GWBII chokes on that lie.

Do I need to point out to both pundits that most of the British Empire (and Spanish, French, etc.) was "freed" without resorting to military violence? These "great tyranical empires" mostly just exhausted themselves by wasting their treasuries on pomposity. Do you recall the "Canadian Revolution"? There wasn't any.

Do I need to point out to the "Bubba Voters" that the chants they are being taught are lies? (Nobody loves the weak! We have to fight overseas to keep our shores safe! Fear your enemies!You need a gun to protect your family from your neighbors! etc.etc.etc.blah,blah,blah)

One of the most powerful countries in the world today is Brazil. If the Portuguese had been polite, they might have avoided rape and made love. Today, while Brazil is blossoming, Portugal has become a third-rate notation in history books.

Soon, our hemisphere will not only be totally free, but we will wish that we had also learned from the Portuguese loss. Our leadership is destined to lead the "Bubba Vote, the Girly Vote, and the christian-Rights" by their noses into continuing wasteful conflicts of revenge-killing, empire-building, and isolation, until we have exhausted our assets and whimper alongside Portugal, Spain, and the depleted military factions of historical footnotes.

I contend that:
"Every musket aimed at the heart of the forces of the tyranny of "those other folks" has already torn asunder this nation conceived in liberty."

I pray that no more gullible warriors will be killed or maimed for naught but the enrichment of the few....on either sides... and that the loss of civilian lives on all sides will no longer be considered "unfortunate collateral damage" by anyone, especially the hypocritical promoters of our God-given "Right to Live".

agnosticrat said...

umm?
Maybe you can help me out here cricket?
The first time I read your comment I thought you were agreed with Pol's point that the best way to beat back tyranny was to vote, but mostly so if you have knowledge about the issues.

"This so pretty that I need some organ music in the background, playing "onward christian soldiers", to a fife and drum accompaniment."


Then I read it again, and thought that you were mocking him for this stance."

"Every musket aimed at the heart of the forces of the tyranny of "those other folks" has already torn asunder this nation conceived in liberty."


The third time I read it I got the distinct impression that you were discussing a different post on another blog.

"One of the most powerful countries in the world today is Brazil. If the Portuguese had been polite, they might have avoided rape and made love. Today, while Brazil is blossoming, Portugal has become a third-rate notation in history books."


Which is it?

el grillo said...

Summing up....The American Revolutionary War was stupid. Nobody wins wars!

Having learned almost nothing from the experience, we decided to commit suicide by warring against ourselves, in the infamous Uncivil War.

Appealing to the Bubba Vote, we glorified the First War to End All Wars, and setting an example for GWBI failed to follow through with measures to prevent the return to warring with even more disastrous results.

Still clinging to our path of devolution, and insisting that we were still related closely to animals, we re-waged another War to End All Wars. This one produced "Victory at Sea" movies and elevated dog-fights to a skill to eventually become an entire video game industry.

Enough historical repetition. The Brazilian example was to emphasize the result we can expect from prancing around in military costumes proclaiming heroism to justify violence.

Every time a "journalist" uses military metaphors that glorify violent responses to conflict, it merely illustrates the inability to conceive of other more intelligent and productive options.

I contend that a really professional "journalist" would heap praise on visionaries that offer options other than violence to resolve social issues, and could muster up enough courage to dodge the temptation to focus on atrocious and uncivilized behaviors. Stabbing, shooting, and blowing stuff up is disgusting, and should be reported as such.

A case in point is this year's high point in Hastings when all of the media rushed to report on a bunch of whack-jobs parading around with pistolas strapped to their pants. These clowns were imitating musket-bearing para-military guys who lacked the imagination and patience for diplomacy and non-violent solutions. The media reps would have wet their pants for an opportunity to film a cross-burning or "Muslim" hanging, and were very disappointed that Sarver was not enough of a Neanderthal to club a few of these cave-dwellers.

Did that help?

Watch the news for the re-naming of the USS Enterprise to the more christian moniker of:
the USS John (CVA-316)
It's flight deck will be covered with the latest version of Crusader jets.
Ladies will cheer all over the USA as Sarah is flown in by McCane to declare Victory over Islam!
It makes my heart leap for joy. Where can I get a Press Pass?

Rightwingnut said...

The line between Republican and Democrat has been blurred so much it's hard to tell where one Party ends and the Other begins. George Bush and Congress have spent like the "Tax and spend Democrats" we thought we voted out of office. The Democrats have control of Congress and all they've managed to do is achieve a lower rating than George Bush.
Now we have (not much of) a choice for President between a Democrat with absolutely no expierience who has chosen a Washington insider as a running mate and a "Maverick" Republicrat who has alienated the Republicans conservative base and has chosen a running mate with very little expierience who is supposed to be a "Maverick" Republican.
I'd ask the Democrats "what were you thinking?", but I'm too busy asking my own party "What were they thinking?".
After the '06 elections we were told. "we know where we went wrong, we abandoned are conservative base". So what do they do for '08? They abandon the Conservative base and distance themselves from us. And now Palin is supposed to be a peace offering to bring the Conservative base back. I quess we're supposed to vote for McCain and hope he can't complete his term.
I don't trust Obama any more than I trust McCain. I think Hillary is far more qualified than Obama to be President. I think it was a mistake not to pick Her as VP.
I've decided I have to vote for McCain, not because he's the best Candidate, but because he will do the least amount of damage.
It would be nice to be able to vote for a Candidate instead of against their opponent.

el grillo said...

The blurred lines will become more distinct as the election approaches. Gradually the debate will address real issues, and the Late Show comic writers will be replaced by intelligent and thoughtful citizens.

That will not have any effect on you and me, since we made up our minds long ago.

The real challenge will be to appeal to the few undecided voters who are not yet brain-dead.

Once you have eliminated the girls who will vote for Palin, the blacks who will vote for Obama, the armed-patriots who will vote for moose-gutting, the KKK-christians, the kill-but-don't-abort hypocrites, car-huggers, and fence-builders, you kind of run out of voters who are really undecided.

If you divided the $millions that they will spend trying to seduce the zombies, by the number of vulnerable zombies, it would make sense to just buy their votes outright.

In the South you used to be able to get a vote for a free beer, but now that Budweiser has defected to Belgium even that has lost its appeal.