Discussing with a friend the two Presidential campaigns, he noted that the Obama campaign was masterfully planned and executed while the McCain campaign was disheveled and found wanting planned direction. I noted that although it's true, I don't see how the Republicans will ever have a masterfully planned and executed campaign. I think that because the members of the Republican Party are more private, whilst the Democratic Party members are more social and by that premise, we have to consider that it's easier to change the thinking of one individual in a group as opposed to changing many individual ideals into thinking like a group, so I'm not sure that the comparison of campaigns is what we need to do.
Democrats seem to discuss things in groups because they are more the social thinkers and they come more easily to a group agreement; the Republicans are more private individuals who tend to come to their own conclusions before engaging in discussion. Therefore, I believe it's easier to convince Democrats to follow; in other words, both parties each given a talented, charismatic, strong leader to follow, it would take longer for the Republicans to champion theirs.
By it's very definition of Democracy or Democratic means majority rule, thereby given the whim of the majority of the people, so shall laws be enacted. This also means social justice, social agreement, social good. and that the one man one vote given above 50% should rule the land. The trouble is that this does not take into account that many can be influenced on the whim, or on the long run with repeated information (true or not) and therefore many can be made to drink the "cool aid" quite easily.
In contrast I believe there are many Libertarian thinkers in the Republican Party that believe that government should stay out of private business and should be minimized. Coupled with the Republicans who believe in representative government which means a governing body that represents the way it's voters think thereby giving the governing body several ways to ponder an issue before it comes to writing law. This is a more diverse group therefore less easily corralled into thinking alike.
One can see by these definitions why the anarchists, fascists, communists, prefer a group of social thinkers to infiltrate with their ideas. Hence the Socialists infiltrated the Democrats and used them to weaken the USA to the point where the real Democrats themselves felt lost and unwelcome within their own party and were soon pushed out. It didn't happen overnight it happened slowly, methodically, through education and propaganda. Like a disease that does it's worst underneath the skin for a long time before it's detected and by that time it's diagnosed, it has done it's worst and to most it feels so natural that they do not realise the danger of it's mutation.
It's such mutations that allow neighbor to turn in neighbor, colleague tell on colleague, friend distrust friend and society to fragment. Normalization comes with syrupy promises and favouritism doled out to those that do fascism's bidding; not realizing that we are all losers in this game and the winners are yet to show their true identities.
Our forefathers knew that balance was needed and therefore could not support a one party system. It is a fine balance and one that needs to be preserved yet we are faced with the possibility of a one party rule; and it will rule in all situations for this next presidential term. Something that our forefathers feared and, those of us who know from experience what it can mean, dread. But don't believe just me, believe those that have lived it then ask yourself, who do you wish this upon?
Your children??? Naivete is funny in the movies but not in real life. Please pass this on.
Thanks for Reading!
Monday, November 3, 2008
blog comments powered by Disqus