Heart of America - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Saved posts from the old blog area.
User avatar
By Demosthenes
#1805236
The intent of this blog is simply to promote my opinions so the idea that it will be free from bias is a little bit of a misnomer. That said, the intent of my opinion is usually to cut through a lot of the bias that passes for political dialogue in the U.S. to whether or not any given "media driven" issue is really even an issue the people on the ground or in the streets are or should be concerned about. I'm not specifically talking about those people on the ground who involve themselves in politics, though they aren't excluded, but more specifically those who never vote yet bear the brunt of the system. More and more I have come to the conclusion that the media forces behind the likes of Rush Limbaugh and his clan on the "alleged" right, and Bill Maher and Michael Moore on alleged "Left" do little other than polarize the people against their own ends, no matter which side of the political aisle the person on the ground finds themselves.

The net effect of this polarization, is a form of thought control by the political elite. This paradigm is orchestrated by their proxies in the various media outlets from AM radio to television to newspapers to the internet. The average person on the street regardless of race, sex, or religion then becomes alienated from one another by an artificial and largely meaningless divide that would see them argue about such seemingly meaningless topics as gun control, abortion, environmentalism, immigration, social welfare programs, and the various celebrity cults that track these persons every move. The endless coverage of these non-issues tend to bleed the life from the real concerns of the people on the ground, the working stiffs and their families, so that rather than speaking out against low wages or the tyranny of American Foreign policy they are left debating the merits of gay marriage and whether or not some straight couple in Texas will be affected by two men they will never meet in Massachusetts getting hitched. I find this situation despicable.

This level of political dialogue renders the US somewhat ignorant in world politics. While some on the US on right will then respond with the Bushesque "So What? We can go our own way!" The fact is, we can't. If we come to any international table still believing the world is flat, we cannot compete for the long term with those who know it is round. When someone who identifies with the Democratic party, for instance, calls themself a liberal it is such a misnomer that I can imagine a European overhearing this rolling their eyes, shrugging their shoulders, and wondering what's in the water over here on this side of the Atlantic. It's an unfortunate set of circumstances but not one that doesn't have clear winners. The two major parties, who are largely shadows of one another, clearly benefit in this joint monopoly on power because they remove any other dialogue from the common lexicon. Make no mistake though, my intent is not to place Europeans or anyone else on a pedestal, my intent to to help separate the American workingman's identity from that of either of these two parties.

In all honesty, if I win few friends from the work I will be doing, it is likely I'll be doing things right. I expect to thoroughly anger both sides of the so-called political aisle at one point or another. Those on the right should be calling me a bleeding heart liberal, and those on the left should be calling me a rabid, nutball conservative. If no one is totally happy with the opinions I will present here, I shall call that a success! In one of my planned entries to come I will tackle most of the issues that I consider to be relevant in one large post. I will put forth my thoughts as first presented in a thread in the North America forum on Politics Forum, with some updating, and perhaps a few twists based on the initial feedback I received.

Whether or not you, the reader, will ultimately agree with me is less important than resting control of our thoughts from the political and media elite that so deftly control them now.

One last word: Let's be clear, I'm not talking conspiracies, or secret backroom deals, or little green men. The elite have simply established a system that maintains order for their benefit above all else. This didn't occur in the dark of night with Bush Cheney and Clintons all meeting in secret. It simply arose as these situations always do from a collective need on the part of the elite to insulate themselves from the common man in order to maintain economic control of both the country and to a certain degree, the world. This may seem like common sense to some, but to others it apparently isn't that common because the political dialogue in this country appears to flow from about 2-3 main sourses, and remains highly stagnant and inflexible. If I can enjoy any success here it will be to become even a minor tributary from which more straight forward and well reasoned dialogue can flow.

It's a lofty goal. I may fail. Still, with luck it'll be fun, entertaining, and thought provoking to try!
User avatar
By Siberian Fox
#1805861
That was a nice length Demosthenes. I checked over the spelling etc. but left a couple of things because I think they are maybe just Americanisms, like "sourses" (?) and words I would not have joined or would have hyphenated. I turned the reference to the North America forum into a hyperlink too.

Would you be willing to accept articles written by other people for the blog as long as they follow your theme? And if so would you like me to leave them for you to review rather than me approving them on my own?

I also created the discussion topic and linked it (i.e. this thread), since it is pretty standard that blogs invite user feedback, and it might encourage new people to join the forum.
User avatar
By Dan
#1806395
The average person on the street regardless of race, sex, or religion then becomes alienated from one another by an artificial and largely meaningless divide that would see them argue about such seemingly meaningless topics as gun control, abortion, environmentalism, immigration, social welfare programs, and the various celebrity cults that track these persons every move. The endless coverage of these non-issues tend to bleed the life from the real concerns of the people on the ground, the working stiffs and their families, so that rather than speaking out against low wages or the tyranny of American Foreign policy they are left debating the merits of gay marriage and whether or not some straight couple in Texas will be affected by two men they will never meet in Massachusetts getting hitched. I find this situation despicable.

I must say I disagree with this section immensely. There is a fundamental cultural divide along these lines of which the issues discussed are only the surface of.

Also those issues you list are not meaningless:

Gun control is not meaningless to those opposed to it; it is a question of freedom vs. tyranny, self-sufficiency vs. dependency, and being safe vs. being prey. The freedom to bear arms is a fundamental check on government and the freedom to have the ability to defend those you love from predators is very important.

Abortion is also extremely important to those opposed to it, to whom it is state sanctioned genocide.

Environmentalism is important to those who support it and also to those who oppose it. Environmentalism is the main thrust of the tranzis nowadays, and preventing them from advancing is crucial.

Immigration is also extremely important; mass illegal immigration is fundamentally altering the character of the American populace.

Social welfare is creating a permanent underclass in America and this is not a meaningless issue either.

These issues are more important than low wages and just as important as foreign policy (not to mention how these issues are interconnected.
User avatar
By Demosthenes
#1806542
Fox- That's fine, I haven't done this before, so whatever seems good to you. I'm still figuring out what I'm doing.

As for Dan's comments, I'll only repeat what I've already said,

My contention is that these issues are "important" to people because they are what the people have been fed. Essentially they are important because the media on both sides have used these issues to create controversy.
User avatar
By Dan
#1806687
My contention is that these issues are "important" to people because they are what the people have been fed. Essentially they are important because the media on both sides have used these issues to create controversy.

I disagree. Gun freedoms, immigration, and abortion were all important before the modern media existed.
User avatar
By FallenRaptor
#1807203
Two thoughts:

1) It isn't really a political elite that controls the mainstream media. The president, his administration, the party leaders, congressmen, senators, etc. don't control the media(although they have a degree of influence). The mainstream media is controlled by an economic elite. The views expressed in it reflect the shareholders, executives, sponsors, etc.

2) The mainstream media mainly consist of capitalist enterprises seeking a profit. Their goal is thus not just to push their own political agenda, but also to get more viewers. This, imo, is a part of the reason why there's so much bullshit covered in the news.

Not a bad article, though.
User avatar
By Demosthenes
#1807207
FallenRaptor wrote:1) It isn't really a political elite that controls the mainstream media. The president, his administration, the party leaders, congressmen, senators, etc. don't control the media(although they have a degree of influence). The mainstream media is controlled by an economic elite. The views expressed in it reflect the shareholders, executives, sponsors, etc.


I didn't mean to imply that it was a direct form of control, hence my disclaimer at the end.

FallenRaptor wrote:2) The mainstream media mainly consist of capitalist enterprises seeking a profit. Their goal is thus not just to push their own political agenda, but also to get more viewers. This, imo, is a part of the reason why there's so much bullshit covered in the news.


No doubt, attracting viewers, readers, etc. is part of it, but I was more thinking sociologically, what is the net effect? That kinda thing.

FallenRaptor wrote:Not a bad article, though.


Thanks! I really just meant for it to be an introduction though, just to give the idea of what is to come.
By Falx
#1809071
You americans need to learn that you don't know jack about anything. Now listen to our nice canadian friend here and learn what is important to you.
User avatar
By Dr House
#1809078
:lol:
User avatar
By Demosthenes
#1809440
Falx wrote:You americans need to learn that you don't know jack about anything. Now listen to our nice canadian friend here and learn what is important to you.


Indeed...
User avatar
By QatzelOk
#1809828
In a scathing satire of American ideology, Dan wrote:The freedom to bear arms is a fundamental check on government...

Yeah, that's what's happening in ghettos all over the USA: crack dealers and gangs are keeping a check on the government.

:lol:
By Stronghand
#13097498
Lemme give it a try! Our socio-political environment is somewhat like a triangle. You have the legislators, the corporations and the voting public. We've been doing this dance since political parties were first formed (Jefferson and Hamilton). As has proved to be the case throughout our brief history, the corporations are the better dancers. Corporations have longivity and money influence leaving the voting public as the weak partner. All involved are just doing what comes natural. It's human nataure for the individual to try to get a leg up on his fellow man in the economic arena. That's a given. And so, down through history we have been warned by Jefferson, TDR, Truman, Ike, Robert Kennedy and many insiders who should know of what they talk that the monied influence brings a powerful corrupting force to government. Jefferson was perhaps the most blunt in his assessment; if we go twenty years without a revolution we have abdicated our responsibility as citizens. RFK was equally blunt if not so statesmanlike; Republicans are 95% corrupt and Democrats are 75% corrupt.
Now, we are getting to the part that bedevils me. Most Amereicans are well aware, politically astute, as to the level of corruption in government. Indeed, IMO we are a Corpocracy more than we are a Republic, a Democracy or a Socialist-democracy. Congress receives a 25% favorable rating while legislators receive a 95% re-election rate. For different reasons, I believe. Some vote for the incumbent to increase their tenure to ensure bigger perks (ear marks and federal allocations to their state or county). Some feel it's the better choice between two evils. And, I'm sure there are a few who feel their legislator is not corrupt, it's the other guy's problem.
Irregardless, this begs the question, what are we going to do about it?
I understand the readers here are well aware of some looming problems: nation wide debt approximating $70 trillion dollars, 12-15% unemployment, inflation up 1170% since the 50's, a 1950 dollar is now worth 11 cents, 50M uninsured, greatest transfer of wealth in the history of mankind, from the greatest nation on earth to a nation of debtors in perpetuity, ad nauseum. Enough of that.
What are we going to do about restoring our Republic, our sovereignty, our constitutional rights and the democratic principles we used to live by? 3k page bills passed into law that nobody has read. A plutocracy comes to mind.
Demosthenes is correct that 'corporate personhood' has legalized the assult on our Republic. 'Money is Free Speech' has also been a strong corruptive influence on government.
The only nonviolent way we can restore the Republic is to put accountability into government. Currently, there is no accountability for legislators who sign bills they haven't read. 'They all do it so one is no more guilty than the rest' and who will remember or care come election time? It's clear to me that the only way to instill accountability in government is through a 3rd party with a different political attitude. A party that can put accountability into the political equation by having party members serve a citizens oversight role for party members who become elected or appointed to political office. A party with an agenda targetted at reform of government and void of hot button social issues. A party formed from inception in a few rules that are highly unlikely to be changed. Should a certain percent of members complain of an incumbent, for example, not following the party's agenda, would force a mandatory vote by the membership. Should the incumbent receive less than 65% of the membership vote he/she will be rejected from the party. The incumbent would finish out their term in office but would not be supported for any future political endeavor.
IMO this is fighting fire with fire. Some folks don't like political parties period, but I see no other way of invoking accountability. On coming to power the first item on the agenda would be to abolish corporate personhood and money is free speech. That would remove the influence of money from politics. Next would be to establish a clean election process and continue to work on the reform agenda.
You can learn about a 3rd party with a different political attitude at http://www.republicsentry.com.
Otherwise, we have the Corpocracy we deserve!

Confessions extracted under torture...seems legit.[…]

^ Wouldn't happen though, since the Israelis are n[…]

I was actually unaware :lol: Before he was […]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

Every accusation is a confession Why sexual v[…]