Thus spake Zarathustra... :-)
Okay, some of what I'm going to say is, I think, pretty
objective, if it's understood to refer to the situation in
America. Other bits of it will indulge my particular
political bias. Oh, well; not like the rest of the posts
here are any more objective...
Consider that, along with the illusion of having only two
choices, the mass media also pretty much sponsors the
illusion that there is only one decision that matters: who
gets the presidency. And that the two political parties
each stand for something simple and definable. And, for
that matter, that your only choices for finding out about
such things are NBC or CBS, or FOX, etc.
In fact, none of this is true. You know darned well there
are more than two guys running for president, and you know
you can get your news without kneeling before the
Television Gods.
But in truth, you know too that there are more positions
being contested than the presidency. Most of us can, if
we choose, at least influence who gets into our state
House and how they vote. Hell, lots of these seats go
uncontested... and these are the people who have to vote
on things like UCITA.
Furthermore, the very idea of a political party is
kind of a joke. You don't seriously believe there's any
cohesion amongst either party, do you? Go to some local
political function, and tell me that what you saw there
looked more like a giant thumb than a zoo where all the
cages got left open. Political parties are vehicles for
individuals to pursue their political goals, nothing
more.
Interestingly, this is why they're effective. A unified
group is almost inevitably too small; they provide no
opportunities to make mutually beneficial alliances with
people who, in part, disagree with you.
Anyway don't believe the centralization scam. And don't
vote for a third party. Don't vote for any party. Vote
for a person.
So much for objectivity. Now a word from Petruchio.
Zarathustra: "that giant red, white and blue star
spangled thumb that continues so relentlessly to snuff any
real change"
And what change would that be? Where do we all want to go
together? I maintain that there can hardly be a better
point of consensus reached than right where we are now.
The key word being, "consensus". Why do we have to
go anywhere together? Really, we don't. It's all part of
that simplistic illusion, the product of the 20th
Century's mass media, mass production, mass education and
mass consumption.
I wish to see the system decentralized. This is, to a
great extent, possible. The internet has already gone a
long way towards setting us free, and tools to preserve
our freedom (such as it is), like strong crypto, are
in our hands. Progress can be made both within the
political arena, and by taking the important issues outside
the political arena.
TIMTOWTDI, in life as in code. I don't want to live by
consensus... I want to be left alone.