In Political Parties, What’s the Difference?
In politics, as in most spheres of life, generalities are often based upon observation and reflect a measure of truth, however inaccurate in the details. (“White men can’t jump.”)
In politics we often hear that there is no difference in the two major political parties. George Wallace, Ronald Reagan, Ross Perot, Howard Phillips, Patrick Buchanan, Alan Keyes, etc., have all beat that drum, as a rallying cry. And there’s a large measure of truth to the charge. After all, both parties love deficit spending. Both parties love asserting US power around the world over people whom we have no business controlling, or rescuing. Both parties will abandon their platforms and principles, if they think it will help them win the next election. Both parties have no concept of what the Constitution says, even though they each take an oath to support and defend that document. Similarities abound.
In politics, perception is more important than reality. If one party can make itself appear to its voter base as the champion of their cause, that is all that matters.
In 2008, by a strange series of circumstances, I found myself in Chattanooga, Tennessee, being interviewed by a Japanese television news team regarding the candidacy of Barack Hussein Obama. I was watching them conduct interviews with white Southern men, and immediately realized that the story, to their editors, was about race, not principles. Electing a black man in a white country? They had to think that was somewhat akin to a Korean getting elected as Prime Minister of Japan! They were clearly looking for a racist tinge to the electorate to get a counter-balance to their interviews done in NYC and other northern cities.
Instead, what they were hearing, over and over, was, “There ain’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties.” And there was absolutely no comprehension in the eyes of the reporters, who kept asking what that meant. I had to smile. And finally, I could stand it no more. I politely injected myself into their interviews. I explained to them what they were not getting, (and, for that matter, what most Americans don’t get). Here’s the summary, which I spoke very slowly so they would catch it all:
“There are some very real differences between the two parties, but most of these people you are asking can see past those differences to the socialist nature of both parties, and they’re not explaining themselves well because they don’t realize that you don’t know what they know.
“One party is the champion of the working class, the ‘People’s Party”, in favor of welfare for the poor – very socialist in nature, based upon the teachings of Karl Marx. You have them in your country. Their mantra is, ‘Workers of the world, unite!’ They want to reduce or eliminate borders, save the whales, and reduce national power in favor of One World Government. These socialists call themselves ‘Democrats’.
“The other party is the champion of the commercial class, Capitalism, private property, and in favor of welfare for corporations and businesses of every type. They want to strengthen the national government, seal off the borders to illegal immigration, to increase our military power and impose American “peace” upon the world. They favor partnership between government and business, just like the National Socialists of Germany and the Fascists of Italy. These socialists call themselves ‘Republicans’.
“So the American voter today has to choose between an International Socialist and a National Socialist. (A Communist and a Nazi.) And these people you are talking to today are not falling for that choice.”
A light went on in his eyes, and I had to suppress a laugh when he said, “Ahhh, so!” (Generalities again.) I do wish I could have seen how much of that made it to the screen in Tokyo. Probably not much. They probably cut my 15 seconds of fame as soon as they saw it, because I have this sneaking suspicion that their own political parties run along similar lines, and if there’s one thing we don’t do, it is to educate the voters to what is being done to them.
Is this to say that every Democrat is a Communist and every Republican a Nazi? Heavens, no! There are lots of conservative Republicans and even a few conservative Democrats. There are even one or two “constitutionalists” who really understand what they’re about. But the power elites who control the party are not usually the faces you see running for office. Like chess pieces on a board, almost no politician is able to make his own moves without approval from on high.
Idealistic newcomers to politics think they can run for office and win, without the help, or the knowledge of the party bosses. Very few of them win, and when they do, it’s usually a fluke – an incumbent dies, or maybe there’s a shift in the demographics, etc. Sometimes the newcomer has enough money to blow out the county or district party bosses.
These “mavericks” are real pests to the party bosses. They hate them with a passion, more than they hate their enemies across party lines. Ron Paul (R) is an example of this type of candidate. James Traficant (D) was another. Sonny Bono (R) was another. Steve Stockman (R) is another. Men who stand on principles instead of bowing and scraping to the party bosses are men who must be sabotaged, one way or another, and murder is not out of the question.
In politics, words have meaning, but not like they do in the real world. They are loaded with symbolism and with a desire to achieve perception over reality. By pitting one class against another, voters are whipsawed into voting for “the lesser of two evils” over and over again, just like Charlie Brown trying to kick that football.
Voters seem to be incapable of realizing that in order to change the system, they are going to have to quit being moved like a mob of sheep with the scare tactic that, if they don’t, they will be the reason that “the bad guys” win. The problem is that “the good guys” are really no better than “the bad guys”. They just smell better.
Becoming an Independent Voter may not mean your next election ballot looks a lot difference, but it will mean that you will quit voting straight party ticket (which ought to be a crime), that you will vote for those candidates you know deserve your vote, because you have done your research.
I could easily support a law that would not allow any voter to vote for or against a candidate whose name they do not recognize, and cannot explain to the registrar what they stand for, but then, I am an incurable idealist.
I could easily support a law forbidding government employees from voting at all, in elections that affect their jobs and incomes. Conflict of interest. A school teacher should not be allowed to vote for school board. A mailman should not be allowed to vote for Congress. A city cop should not be allowed to vote for mayor. Etc.
When you distill it down, Politic Parties are the whores of the body politic, and the party bosses are pimps. And voters are the “Johns”. If you let them own your vote, then you are not an independent voter, you are a sucker.
When you vote, learn the issues. Learn the candidates, on both sides. And only vote for those where you can cast an informed vote, whether for or against. (An uninformed vote is worse than no vote at all.)
Now. We’re down to it. Want to make your vote count? Want to make a difference? If you only know three good candidates, regardless of the offices, then call a few friends and motivate them to vote for those candidates. (In the process, you are going to find that some of them also know of one or two candidates, so your list may grow.) When ten of you vote as a bloc you will have just created your own independence movement away from party politics and toward electing men and women of conscience and principle.
But it won’t happen until you stop voting for party hacks and accepting what the party bosses give you. Start electing an Independent here and there and watch the parties suddenly start finding their principles again!
Vote your conscience – for a change!
Vote INDEPENDENT!
