Tweedle-dum or tweedle-dee, or pure idealism, or just plain idealism? It never ceases to amaze us how America, of all nations, is so reluctant to do something as minimal as peacefully and civilly announcing a "pox on both their houses" when it comes to the pretty much corrupt major political parties, here, and merely vote for virtually anything that says I'm not a part of them, meaning whatever available third parties and independents there are. Yet, third parties do dreadfully poorly as voters willfully play musical chairs between the Democrats and the Republicans, and therein goes the puzzle inside the dilemma. Do third parties persist in spite of the practically mind-boggling poor election numbers or should they just take on an "if you can't beat them, join them" posture even though the latter is something akin to self-flagellation? Actually, most of the minor parties are themselves to blame by taking on a defeatist attitude and pretty much being comfortable with being nothing more than glorified debating societies as opposed to actually trying to contest elections with regularity, and with full vigor and energy, no matter the long odds or the recent history of failure. That's a big problem, because it's hard enough for an already cynical-about-government public to consider reflectively cynical new parties. Nonetheless, our party, the energetic Party of Commons, a.k.a. Revived Citizens Party, is not your run-of-the-mill "minor" party.
By definition, practically, opposition parties or politicians are suppose to offer hope, not a mirror of our most pessimistic prognoses, but the other half of the problem is that the public, by and large, will not take even the slightest of political risks even as the elected charlatans that dominate politics do nothing but dutifully build economic, environmental and moral "houses of cards," exactly as they are instructed to do so by their corporate bosses. It's the perfect storm, as one feeds off the other. So what to do? Join them? It's almost too depressing and uninspiring to contemplate, though apparently pragmatic, but pragmatism is just another word for settling, or perhaps a seemingly infinitely slow and grinding path to rightfulness. So in regards to the vacant 30th legislative seat in Washington, the course that we choose, if any, will say a lot about the tug-of-war in America, though hardly a match, between uninspiring, dutiful, but perhaps slyly dutiful, pragmatism, and upstart, daunting, though not necessarily futile, idealism: a very hard choice.
By definition, practically, opposition parties or politicians are suppose to offer hope, not a mirror of our most pessimistic prognoses, but the other half of the problem is that the public, by and large, will not take even the slightest of political risks even as the elected charlatans that dominate politics do nothing but dutifully build economic, environmental and moral "houses of cards," exactly as they are instructed to do so by their corporate bosses. It's the perfect storm, as one feeds off the other. So what to do? Join them? It's almost too depressing and uninspiring to contemplate, though apparently pragmatic, but pragmatism is just another word for settling, or perhaps a seemingly infinitely slow and grinding path to rightfulness. So in regards to the vacant 30th legislative seat in Washington, the course that we choose, if any, will say a lot about the tug-of-war in America, though hardly a match, between uninspiring, dutiful, but perhaps slyly dutiful, pragmatism, and upstart, daunting, though not necessarily futile, idealism: a very hard choice.
Comments
Post a Comment