paulaholic
05-06-2010, 06:11 PM
This political essay was written by me. Feel free to disseminate it around the Internet or to the inboxes of the brainwashed. I need no credit.
By Dustin Petzold – April 28, 2010 – Every time an election rolls around, I see and hear a barrage of public service announcements designed to increase voter participation. The 2008 Presidential election drew such rabid interest that I noticed quite a few clipboard-wielding partisans encouraging passers-by to register right then and there – with hopes that the t-shirts they were wearing might subliminally influence their recruit’s decision come November. And I’ve heard countless conversations in which a politically apathetic person is being chastised, admonished, or otherwise harangued for his or her disinterest in voting. “It’s your civic duty”, the voting advocates always say. “People fought for that right”.
They’re right. If you are a woman, minority, or anything besides a white male property owner, then you are indebted to a small but fiercely motivated group of people who dedicated a good part of their lives in order for you to receive voting privileges. That’s why it’s high time we began to take voting more seriously.
But let’s be honest: the act of casting a vote, in and of itself, is not some challenging or heroic act. Anyone with the mental capacity to stare at options on a screen or piece of paper, and choose one, can do it. It is an experience tantamount to the flipping a coin, or the choosing of a Value Meal at your local McDonald’s. It is supposed to be all of the research and evaluation of candidates’ voting records, political ethics, and moral character behind the vote that make it meaningful. But in today’s shallow, celebrity-crazed, and extraordinarily gullible culture, there is as little intelligent thought involved in the electoral process as ever before.
It’s funny how the “new voters”, who are purported to be the keys to “getting our voices heard”, are the very thing that has allowed the Washington political establishment to continue as is, despite populist wishes to the contrary. Casual voters make up about 90 percent of America’s electorate, while the other ten percent is made up of “activists” or “political junkies”. These casual voters do not follow politics closely, and make knee-jerk decisions based on warped impressions of the candidates that have come to them via CNN or Fox News.
Which brings me to my next point: the mainstream news media, particularly on television, is not, and never will be, a reliable or trustworthy way to gain information about the political process. During the 2008 election cycle, in-depth analyses of our country’s economic policy, foreign policy, and the ways to change them for the better, were sorely lacking. Instead, our media’s air-headed pundits spent hour after hour huffing and puffing about Barack Obama’s flag pin, Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter, and Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits. Keep in mind that a great many people actually base their voting decisions on this sensationalism and misinformation.
Despite the fact that garbage is being shoveled in to the brains of Americans at an unprecedented rate, the Internet has blessed us with unparalleled access to the information that really matters. A few quick clicks can help anyone find the complete voting record of any Senator or Congressman. Also, the Internet has been a great outlet for independent news and editorial agencies, whose alternative views are either marginalized or ignored by the status-quo-loving mainstream media. Third party and independent candidates have also found the Internet to be an invaluable resource in helping to get their names and messages into the public sphere.
Why is it that, election after election, the public is always clamoring for reform and expressing their discontent with current political affairs, but incumbent officeholders get re-elected at an incredibly high rate? Because people enjoy being the rebel, at least superficially, but their opinions are weak, easily swayed, and lack support from a strong set of principles. Too often, the public allows the media to foster an electoral environment akin to that of a horse race. Pick your candidate, and cheer them to the finish lines. Buy bumper stickers, hats, and make up catchy little rallying cries. Don’t know much about their political beliefs? No problem! Because your candidate is fun and charismatic and such a great person! It’s the classic cult of personality.
Why are third party candidates so universally unsuccessful even when “we need a third party” is a favorite platitude of the uninformed politico? Because the horseracing environment sets in once again, the cretins can’t relent to their overwhelming desire to vote for the winner. If all the people who ever said, “I really like [insert third party candidate here] best, but I can’t throw away my vote” just went ahead and voted for him anyway, he might just stand a chance, right? We’ll probably never know.
Like many others, I would love to see voter participation increase, but only if political awareness increases at an even greater rate. If however, the population of voters is still overwhelmed by those who, despite their endless opportunity to make an informed electoral decision, still choose to cast a “which one would you rather have a beer with?” vote, they should just stay home. They must spare us from their idiocy and allow those who have executed their civic duty properly to be rewarded with increased influence. Sometimes, less is more. When it’s stupidity we’re talking about, much, much less is always a good thing.
By Dustin Petzold – April 28, 2010 – Every time an election rolls around, I see and hear a barrage of public service announcements designed to increase voter participation. The 2008 Presidential election drew such rabid interest that I noticed quite a few clipboard-wielding partisans encouraging passers-by to register right then and there – with hopes that the t-shirts they were wearing might subliminally influence their recruit’s decision come November. And I’ve heard countless conversations in which a politically apathetic person is being chastised, admonished, or otherwise harangued for his or her disinterest in voting. “It’s your civic duty”, the voting advocates always say. “People fought for that right”.
They’re right. If you are a woman, minority, or anything besides a white male property owner, then you are indebted to a small but fiercely motivated group of people who dedicated a good part of their lives in order for you to receive voting privileges. That’s why it’s high time we began to take voting more seriously.
But let’s be honest: the act of casting a vote, in and of itself, is not some challenging or heroic act. Anyone with the mental capacity to stare at options on a screen or piece of paper, and choose one, can do it. It is an experience tantamount to the flipping a coin, or the choosing of a Value Meal at your local McDonald’s. It is supposed to be all of the research and evaluation of candidates’ voting records, political ethics, and moral character behind the vote that make it meaningful. But in today’s shallow, celebrity-crazed, and extraordinarily gullible culture, there is as little intelligent thought involved in the electoral process as ever before.
It’s funny how the “new voters”, who are purported to be the keys to “getting our voices heard”, are the very thing that has allowed the Washington political establishment to continue as is, despite populist wishes to the contrary. Casual voters make up about 90 percent of America’s electorate, while the other ten percent is made up of “activists” or “political junkies”. These casual voters do not follow politics closely, and make knee-jerk decisions based on warped impressions of the candidates that have come to them via CNN or Fox News.
Which brings me to my next point: the mainstream news media, particularly on television, is not, and never will be, a reliable or trustworthy way to gain information about the political process. During the 2008 election cycle, in-depth analyses of our country’s economic policy, foreign policy, and the ways to change them for the better, were sorely lacking. Instead, our media’s air-headed pundits spent hour after hour huffing and puffing about Barack Obama’s flag pin, Sarah Palin’s pregnant daughter, and Hillary Clinton’s pantsuits. Keep in mind that a great many people actually base their voting decisions on this sensationalism and misinformation.
Despite the fact that garbage is being shoveled in to the brains of Americans at an unprecedented rate, the Internet has blessed us with unparalleled access to the information that really matters. A few quick clicks can help anyone find the complete voting record of any Senator or Congressman. Also, the Internet has been a great outlet for independent news and editorial agencies, whose alternative views are either marginalized or ignored by the status-quo-loving mainstream media. Third party and independent candidates have also found the Internet to be an invaluable resource in helping to get their names and messages into the public sphere.
Why is it that, election after election, the public is always clamoring for reform and expressing their discontent with current political affairs, but incumbent officeholders get re-elected at an incredibly high rate? Because people enjoy being the rebel, at least superficially, but their opinions are weak, easily swayed, and lack support from a strong set of principles. Too often, the public allows the media to foster an electoral environment akin to that of a horse race. Pick your candidate, and cheer them to the finish lines. Buy bumper stickers, hats, and make up catchy little rallying cries. Don’t know much about their political beliefs? No problem! Because your candidate is fun and charismatic and such a great person! It’s the classic cult of personality.
Why are third party candidates so universally unsuccessful even when “we need a third party” is a favorite platitude of the uninformed politico? Because the horseracing environment sets in once again, the cretins can’t relent to their overwhelming desire to vote for the winner. If all the people who ever said, “I really like [insert third party candidate here] best, but I can’t throw away my vote” just went ahead and voted for him anyway, he might just stand a chance, right? We’ll probably never know.
Like many others, I would love to see voter participation increase, but only if political awareness increases at an even greater rate. If however, the population of voters is still overwhelmed by those who, despite their endless opportunity to make an informed electoral decision, still choose to cast a “which one would you rather have a beer with?” vote, they should just stay home. They must spare us from their idiocy and allow those who have executed their civic duty properly to be rewarded with increased influence. Sometimes, less is more. When it’s stupidity we’re talking about, much, much less is always a good thing.