<!-- --><style type="text/css">@import url(https://www.blogger.com/static/v1/v-css/navbar/3334278262-classic.css); div.b-mobile {display:none;} </style> </head><body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d12700298\x26blogName\x3dillumined+horizon\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttps://illuminedhorizon.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_US\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://illuminedhorizon.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d-7874921071632696697', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
0 comments | Friday, April 07, 2006

I've been reading a lot about these nutty terms South Park Republican, triangulation, DLC, Blue Dog Democrat, DINO, RINO, etc, and this stuff kind of makes you want to fall in with the conspiracy crowd. I mean I think it's basically the political system (and the lack of instant runoff voting and not to mention proportional representation) that entrenches the two parties and leaves all others outside of the sandbox; but it makes you wonder about politicians not being tethered to any firm standing beliefs (I'm not talking flip-flops again!).

What I'm talking about is this dialectic/binary opposition that seemingly creates an antagonistic system. And if this is all a smokescreen, what happens when the poles of opposition drift ostensibly into harmony? Who are they representing, if not their bases and the interests that they nominally speak for? Of course, we know they always already represent their corporate paymasters, but what might the other groups they are representing be? This article does a good job of explaining much of what I ask in non-conspiratorial terms; but the other possibility for me would seem to be that the whole thing is an elaborate setup to make voters think they are participating in change, when in fact they are participating in a charade. Ultimately, I think this is pie in the sky thinking, because our elected 'representatives' (without major social and political change) will act as legitimate as long as the system continues to put them in power (look at Dubya with two stolen elections); but if there were more evidence to support what I'm suggesting I would probably be a card carrying member of the tinfoil hat crowd. Of course, I've come full circle in my reasoning at this point, because the reason I'm not a conspiracist (or don't identify as such) is because the conspiracy books and information I have read I think make too many leaps with too little evidence and information. And, well, with what I'm proposing I can't back it up with facts either, but the more reading I do about ostensibly Republican or Democratic groups and individuals the more I wish I had the missing link that would connect the dots and verify a method (even if a diabolical one) to this madness.


Post a Comment

<< Home