Verbal warfare through radical ideals

(Per)Version Of A Truth

Good day, children.

This week, a long and highly anticipated event will take place. Our presidential election in the United States has become a nightmare; a barrage of negative TV ads, wasting not only the time of the people of the states, but their money as well. Generous donations flowed in to fund what most people believed to be a worthwhile cause. Millions of phone calls were placed; pleas for votes, and empty promises were uttered as many devout supporters rallied their troops and tallied wins and losses. This well-oiled machine needs no introduction to the society we live in. We’re all explicitly familiar with the method campaigns take to obtain victory. A slew of pseudo-patriotic, vaguely heartwarming phrases were recycled and coined, all in an effort to try and make headlines, or make bumper stickers. Safe-words were viciously repeated to large audiences, all in a desperate ploy to “relate to the middle class”.

This vain exercise proved to have little impact in our politically desensitized nation; being forced to endure fake smiles while hearing “fix the economy”, “make more jobs”,  “grassroots campaign”,  “support our troops”, “best nation in the world”, and “God bless America”, is a recipe to cause any free-thinking individual to cringe on command. Yes, there will be people out there who label me as a cynical anti-American, which I guess is ironic considering that would be their recycled catchphrase for people they don’t agree with. If you are actually moved to tears by these tasteless one-liners by modern political figures, then there’s a good chance you’re a gullible voter who refuses to think for yourself.

Unfortunately, regardless of what people tell you; your vote DOES NOT count in a significant manner. There will also be vast opposition to that statement, as people flush out the same “it’s your civic duty”, “you can’t complain if you don’t vote”, and “how dare you tell people that” quotes that I’m so weary of reading. If we were to compare “American Idol”, to the American electoral system, you would potentially possess more freedom, and have more of a weighted vote when choosing a fairly decent pop singer, than you would if you were to attempt to elect the “leader of the free world”. You choose which president looks prettier in a picture and on paper. You do not hand them the keys to the city. The electoral college does that, and they’re already bought and paid for according to state demographics that, if you live in most states, won’t budge. You can feel good that you chose to vote and it IS a patriotic gesture, but in the end it’s fairly out of your hands. This is especially true if you’re a voter who tends to look at the real candidates who are caught outside of the limelight of mainstream politics. If you vote for a candidate outside the GOP or DNC, you might as well be asking to be ignored. You’ll also be widely regarded as an “independent voter”, which somehow translates to “I don’t know who I want to vote for. Please bombard me with propaganda so I can choose one of two people I probably won’t care for”. This is an idea that must stop, if our democracy is to survive.

Now, I would normally not be inclined to pick a side on the election. Usually I would be of the neutral mindset that “both campaigns are nothing but fundamentally different perspectives, and should be respected as such”. Unfortunately, I can’t do that this time. I could, and hold on to a sense of neutrality that is more than likely healthy; however, I would be kidding myself. We live in the 21st century; a time that when viewed in reverse from the past is depicted as a flourishing Utopia of technology and life, where people could put aside their differences and advance towards a better tomorrow. This vision did not come true, and our political system is a disgusting rivalry between the party of Eco-conscious, socially acceptable moderates (they aren’t liberal. Regardless of how often it gets repeated, these people haven’t seen a real liberal in 30 years),  and an archaic party of folklore-obsessed plutocrats, all of whom pine away for seats in a broken congress, or executive office. To call this an updated approach to politics would be a cruel joke.

The Democrats, who I would say haven’t really had a hero since Kennedy, are practically voiceless. Because they choose a softer method to their political messages, they are incessantly beaten down by the Republican party, who throughout the late 90’s managed to successfully turn the term “liberal” into a profane word. They are now repeating the process by grasping at the president, who despite constant reports that he is “turning this country into a godless, socialist society that lives for wealth redistribution”, has done nothing even close to this. Amongst these ludicrous stories, are the ones that make the before mentioned tale look almost sane, such as the infamous “Barack Obama is a Kenyan who illegally obtained the presidency”, as well as the story of  “Obama is a Muslim”. These are false tales designed to coerce the most incompetent voters into fear-induced ballot-casting. People left behind by the information age reside in this pocket of the conservative party; safely hidden from facts behind a curtain of pre-cold war rhetoric. I can’t entirely blame them. This is the party of liberty they know of old, and if they haven’t failed them yet, why would they decide to sway their decision now? Tragically, the target audience of the GOP has become those retiring. More so, they have worked tirelessly to ensure that they possess the vast majority of geriatric Caucasian voters. If you think this to be untrue, then the statistics are at your disposal to review.

While I agree that it is not appropriate to judge Mitt Romney as a party member as it is to judge him as a qualified candidate, you cannot divorce him from the party he belongs to. To do so, is to completely ignore some of the ridiculous axioms that the GOP lives by. While I normally would never suggest that one party is superior to the other, I can’t say that without violating all moral inclinations. I would have to be absolutely out of my mind to suggest that a party, that is so torn over the subject of abortion as if it were “only okay sometimes”, and at the same time “completely immoral 100% of the time”, could be reasonable. Amongst the various nations that have accepted evolution as credible, the United States is listed as 32nd on the list. I would point out some of the countries on that list, but quite a few are far below our country’s standard of living, and it would only infuriate conservatives further. The problem with this, is that an uneducated population is easier to control, and more devoutly believes in their “fearless leader” without question. Therein, the link between religion and politicians has to be one and the same, lest the party of “believers” becomes angry and begins a campaign of malice towards someone whom they deem foreign, and inevitably, “the enemy”.

The hypocrisy of this party is also painfully evident in their economic tendencies. The conservative party was recently most famous for Ronald Reagan’s famous “trickle-down” economic policy; a system implemented in the 80’s to combat a recession. The idea was to allow wealthy individuals tax-breaks, as an incentive to invest more of their money into the economy. Unfortunately, despite enthusiasm it was an utter failure. We learned the hard way that millionaires who can afford to take their money anywhere, don’t just invest anywhere. Their money made it into Swiss accounts, and into the places that most people would consider “prime spring-break vacation spots”, which ironically weren’t domestically located. Because of blind adoration for Saint Reagan, the losses incurred by Reaganomics went largely unnoticed. Trickle-down as an idea disappeared for awhile…or so we thought. However he handled his politics though, Reagan was, and is  (for some reason) still loved by many conservatives today. Most of those are misguided, awkwardly inaccurate tales of a man who was an aloof, devout old fellow, who merely wished to help everyone in the country, while at the same time never bow down to our “enemies” by compromise.

Ronald Reagan

What people don’t realize, is that Reagan was none of these things. From the words of his own personally hired biographer, Ron was a secular president, who was portrayed accurately on Saturday Night Live when he was shown as cheery when in the room with others, and while alone an edgy, stern critical thinker, lost in thought that often tormented and depressed him. Reagan also never took the time to care about AIDS in the country, until it struck him as a personal tragedy. When Rock Hudson, the famous actor and close personal friend of Ron died in 1985 due to an AIDS-related illness, Reagan realized all too late what little he had done for those who suffered with it. Much of his thinking regarding this issue changed with Hudson’s demise. Reagan began to consider the difficult lives of the LGBT community, which is a topic that the GOP would never relate to, because their religious tenets play an active role in suppressing the rights and liberties of those people. Does the GOP honestly think Ronald Reagan would be on the band-wagon with them, given the circumstances?

Even on issues of war that conservatives hold in high regard, Reagan held none of their beliefs. As much as I love Kennedy, not even HE considered total nuclear disarmament. Between Reagan and Gorbachev, they nearly accomplished just that. However, due to a roadblock from congress, this was never to pass. Does that sound like a Republican idea? Most importantly, was Reagan’s flip-flop on foreign policy views with the Soviet Union. Had Gorbachev and Reagan not become friends, there might still be a conflict today plaguing the world, if not worse. Reagan’s compromise for peace the with Soviet Union came without bloodshed, and without a single bomb dropped over the USSR. This type of thinking is NOT reflected by modern day Republicans, who believe any and all problems can be solved overseas with an armed forces invasion, and multitudes of large artillery.

I find it hard to believe that Ronald Reagan would’ve ever become a candidate for the party that hates the “Hollywood Media Elite”, given that he was a career long actor turned politician. Do you?

Barack Obama

Although I was hesitant to bring this up, I feel it only necessary to point out the obvious. The Republican party, who does not wish to admit to possessing a blind spot to race and ethnicity, should do just that. A news story released in 2008 regarding the election of Barack Obama asked the question “Are you ready for a black president”? The majority of these individuals, answered “no”. Of course, the station treated this with the utmost neutrality. WHY!? This question, which was outwardly charged to deliver this kind of response, proved that people have a difficult time moving past ethnicity. To state “Oh no, I’m just not ready for a Black man in the White House”, is quite possibly one of the worst cover-ups for blatant racism imaginable. Do I have to point out to people why this doesn’t make sense? I already know I’m going to hear from others that the “media is trying to inflame racial prejudices”, as well as “more black people are racist than white”, but these idiotic statements exist as a straw-man argument, allowing a consistent topic that people attempt to avoid. To evade the issue, is to become part of the problem, and the problem is more than the economy. The problem, is when people are willing to shroud social issues with economic ones. It’s the reason people are willing to call the president a “Kenyan, anti-American Muslim who illegally holds his office, got into Harvard because of affirmative action, and is a socialist”, even though he took his own fucking healthcare plan from THE GUY HE IS RUNNING AGAINST! The issue of racism lives on, regardless of who is willing to admit it. Brushing it aside doesn’t change the reconstruction era, where this exact same thing happened. See the “liberal media link” below if you actually want to learn something.

Lastly, I understand fully that women care about the economy, and jobs. That is not an excuse though, to throw the same women under a steamroller on issues that pertain to them. Somehow, this idea has plagued us lately that wanting to give women the right to decide their own path in matters of women’s healthcare is a “guise to divide the nation”. How? Does someone have an actual argument for this, or is this just one more control that the right is afraid to lose? I know nothing about women’s healthcare besides what my girlfriend tells me, and as I guy I don’t believe I’m anywhere near qualified to decide what women can, and cannot do. I would expect the same of females regarding male healthcare, and I would expect they wouldn’t protest much against it. How is this an issue? How is this still up for debate? Do people honestly think that getting women involved in their own medical field is some sort of conspiracy to throw a veil over the economy? Do people actually think women’s health CAN hide the current state of the economy?

Today is November the 5th. A day for all lovers of freedom and rebellion to rejoice, as we recall the infamous “terrorist” Guy Fawkes. His mission to blow up parliament became popular in recent history with the movie “V For Vendetta”, a brilliant look at what happens when an Ultra-Conservative party takes over, using religion and pseudo-morals to control the mass populace into a fear-induced delirium. It’s also a personal holiday for my gaming legion and I, as we celebrate what it means to be outcasts in our own community. Much like the president, our ideas are not widely accepted. Our views, are “foreign”, and “dangerous”. Many people have been too fearful of social persecution to join our ranks, and because we don’t keep quiet the public is rallied against us.

You can not keep quiet, in an election this big. Whether it’s spreading the word in text, or teaching others dearest to you, idealistic volume matters. Intellectual discussions, and debates matter. Free-thinking is something that a political party inhibits you from doing, because there’s no room for thinking when you have to get in line with red or blue. Think for yourself. This is not the better of two evils. This is the difference between returning to the comfortable past of black and white, and the terrifying world of stepping forward, and showing that grey exists between.

I don’t know how this election will end, but I can say that I at least attempted to make myself heard despite overwhelming opposition. The last thing you want to do is approach election day with an understanding like these people:

Remember, remember
The fifth of November
The gunpowder treason and plot.
I know of no reason
Why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot.

Happy November the fifth, everyone.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s